AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Swan Song

16th November 1956
Page 66
Page 66, 16th November 1956 — Swan Song
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?

ACCORDING to the legend, the swan sings only in the hour before its death. The Road Haulage Disposal Board were scarcely as mute as this. Whatever their omissions may have been in other directions, they never failed to produce their six-monthly report as enjoined by the Transport Act, 1953. But their seventh and last report contains information about which they had previously kept silent.

They admit that there were not infrequent clashes of opinion among members, although the disagreements did not reach the point at which the Minister of Transport would have been required to give a direction. Now that it no longer matters, the Board also say that the method of sale of transport units by public tender proved not well suited to the direct purchase of vehicles by the genuine small man.

The much-maligned dealer, who made a practice of buying transport units with the deliberate intention of re-selling them, receives a somewhat grudging acknowledgement that he served a useful purpose. The small man for whom the units were intended was intimidated by the legal formalities, even when they were "kept to a minimum," as the Board claims. The period between tendering and taking delivery was inevitably spread over several weeks. If the bid were unsuccessful, the tenderer had to begin again from scratch, losing several months and with no greater certainty of success next time.

The Board accept as natural that many small men preferred to buy from a dealer. They might have to pay more, but they could at least have immediate delivery of a vehicle and the assignment of the special A licence.

Some steps were taken to ease the difficulties of the small man. The terms of the contract were not strictly enforced where there was genuine difficulty in paying the deposit or completing the purchase on the due date. One can understand the Board's reluctance to make this known earlier. Had operators generally become aware that leniency had been exercised in hard cases, the exception would speedily have become the rule.

Alternative Tenders

Wider publicity might have been given to the Board's efforts to help where alternative tenders were submitted. Undoubtedly, many prospective buyers were perplexed to find in one list several units that would equally suit their requirements, or that they could arrange in an order of preference. They hesitated to make bids for all the suitable units when they needed, or could afford, only one. There was a risk that all their bids would be accepted, and they would be committed to an expenditure they could not afford.

Strictly speaking, they could not qualify a tender by making it contingent on the rejection of another. As time went on, it became known, but perhaps not widely known, that the Board were prepared to look tolerantly at tenders linked in this way. As their final report states, "an effort was made to meet the tenderer's requirements." There might have been many more tenders had the Board ignored their legal qualms and announced during the sales their willingness to assist the small man who wished to spread his net but not his commitments.

There are still many questions that remain unanswered. B32

On the subject of the reserve price, the Board insis that there is no such thing, and repeat the somewha involved explanation that originally appeared in theh second report. They say justly that no one price couk have been appropriate for all cases. The Board "deter mined each case as a jury on the best evidence avail. able," and in doing so paid the closest attention to tht evidence provided by the tendering.

Regrettably perhaps; few operators took any notice oi this attempt in the second report to lay the ghost of the reserve price. Most of the knowledgeable bidders spent a good deal of time in permutations and combinationt based on various amounts per ton of unladen weight. The general opinion was that, even if the Board preferred to judge each case in isolation, the British Trans. port Commission certainly had their own reserve prices. It was reasonable to suppose that the Commission would know what their own assets were worth, and would be able after a very few sales to estimate the price of a special. A licence.

Specific Interests

The final report throws little light on the reasons for the Government's abrupt change of policy in July, 1955. The list of large units in England and Wales was offered in March, and tendering closed shortly before the general election. Only 23 units were sold, containing 528 vehicles out of 6,115. Despite a fair 'number of other large units being sold, say the Board, "it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the market for medium and large units was limited to a comparatively small number of purchasers with specific interests."

Hauliers will continue to maintain that the force of the Board's argument would be stronger if the larger units had been re-offered (as had become the custom) after the election, or if it had been made plain at the outset that bidders would have no second chance.

The Board failed to sell the large units, and the report casts doubts on whether they adequately satisfied the requirements of the small man. The 1953 Act provided that persons with only small resources must be given a reasonable opportunity of entering or re-entering the industry. The report states that this opportunity had been given, but that there is no evidence how far it had been taken by the small man "rather than by larger men buying small units."

The small man who bids vainly against a larger operator might feel that the Board are amusing themselves at his expense. In the ordinary sense of the words, a "reasonable opportunity" would have meant the offer of a small unit at a fair price, and not its sale to somebody else at an even higher price.

One of the faults of the Board for most of their life was their preoccupation with the transport unit, which they admit was often split up after purchase and resold either by operators or dealers. As time went on, the lists consisted more and more of vehicle-only units, which in turn consisted of fewer vehicles. "The final lists were made up almost entirely of single vehicle units." Had the Board grasped this simple principle earlier, and sold all the vehicles singly except where they were grouped round premises, the smalI.man would have had a better chance, and the sales might have been quicker and better.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus