AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Furnisher wins appeal in part

16th June 1967, Page 40
16th June 1967
Page 40
Page 40, 16th June 1967 — Furnisher wins appeal in part
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

E Transport Tribunal has allowed in rpart an appeal by T. A. Dixon whose application for one vehicle on B licence to carry "household furniture removals, household effects and furniture within 10 miles' radius of base" was refused by the West Midlands LA.

The appellant claimed he had established need at the public inquiry. The respondents, C. Udall and Co., L. Kendrick and Sons Ltd., and D. Horton (Walsall) Ltd., claimed they had established spare capacity.

The Tribunal agreed there was no shortage of suitable transport but considered that as a house furnisher T. A. Dixon on occasion would require wider facilities and in consequence allowed the appeal with a limited condition: "Household furniture and effects for customers who have purchased furniture from the appellant within one month immediately preceeding the carriage, within a radius of 10 miles".