Beeline seeks clarification on fantail operation
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Beeline Roadways Ltd, of Middlesbrough and West Hartlepool, at Edinburgh on Tuesday sought authorization from the Scottish Traffic Commissioners for tours to Scotland and asked for clarification of the position over fantail excusions. There was no legal authority for the view often taken that only one was acceptable, said Mr Trevor Barker, managing director, whose company and associates are now challenging the position in applications throughout the country.
Mr Campbell Wardlaw, for Beeline, said a situation had arisen whereby one fantail excursion was allowed to a packaged tour operator. However, who had enunciated that principle, when, and with what authority no one knew.
The principle, for what it was worth, had, he said, been laid down in the years before the Second World War, was now completely out-dated and should be forgotten. Each tour and its attendant fantail excursions should be looked at for its individual worth.
If that could not be achieved it was time that some clarification and some official decision should be given. There was no legal standing for the principle, if indeed there was such a principle, he added_ Mr Barker contended that the present situation led to the tour operator being held to ransom by the local operators; unless greater freedom were permitted and the legal position clarified, this would continue. The tour operator was taking in the customers from his area of origin and should not be required to hand these over to local operators who had done nothing to take them to the terminal point of the tour.
The tour operator should have freedom to make fantail tours subject to approval of the Traffic Commissioners, without being held to ransom, said Mr Barker.
Beeline had applied for backing to grants made in their primary area in November 1970 but through a variety of causes had never got confirmation of backing from the Scottish area. They had assumed this was granted, in view of the correspondence, and had operated in 1971 and 1972.
The main objection by Highland Omnibuses was against a proposed fantail tour to Easdale. It was shown in evidence that the local operator who had done the work for Beeline did not hold the appropriate licences. It was also contended, and denied, that Highland had not hired buses when sought and had made excessive demand for payment for use of their licence. Normally, said Mr Barker, they paid £1 to a local operator for use of his licence, hiring their touring bus to that licensed operator; alternatively they could use a vehicle provided and operated by the licensed local operator and he did not consider a 10 per cent fee as excessive for such use.
At -the end of the day it agreed that tour applications for the Scottish Highlands and Royal Deeside, and for Trossachs and Argyll, would be granted backing. The Oban tour would be granted subject to operation of the fifth day fantail by a local • operator. That left only the Dunoon tour to be decided from the matters then before the court and this was agreed subject to Argyll County Council approval on routes. Mr A. B. Birnie, Chairman of the Commissioners, in giving decision said that there had been a measure of lack of control in the operator's organization and "incompetence" came to mind. It was not in the public interest that 'a man who acted illegally should be granted extra tours. He asked the firm to check carefully in future that any operator selected to operate a local section of the packaged tour should be legally entitled to do so and an assurance was given that this would be done.