L.N.E.R.'s Disregard for Licensing Laws
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
QEVERE criticism was directed against the London and North-Eastern Railway Co. by Mr. J. H. Stick, East Midland Licensing Authority, at Nottingham recently, when ' it tVa..5 revealed that an additional vehicle, for which the ...railway was applying, had been, in use for 18 months. Stirk said he thought he was entitled to an explanation 'frbm the company and intithated that he would adlourn the application.
Mr. A. S. Dolden, solicitor to the L.N.E.R:, applied for an additional vehicle for the Worksop base, and Mr. V. Laycock, cartage assistant. to the district. goods manager, Sheffield', said the coMpany had eight vehicles based at Worksop ad an additional vehicle was required essentially . for collection anddelivery. Since 1937, an additional vehicle had been in operation at Worksop, to deal yith extra traffic, and the present, vehicle had been there since September, 1938.
Mr. Stick asked: " Why has it taken 18 months to make
the application? Why didn't you get permission to put it there? What would you say to a mad operator if he disclosed the things you have now disclosed?
Mr. Dolden: "The length of the period should he in our favour. We have proved 'theneed."
.Mr. Stirk: " Is not that the justification every road operator would like to have? Speaking from memory, I believe the railway company should send me a quarterly report of the movement of its vehicles."
Mr. Dolden said there was no suggestion of trickery, and Mr. Stirk retorted: " I do not suggest there is, but I am entitled to criticize the action of the railviay company in coming before me with an application to put nil additional vehicle at Worksop when I find it has been there for 18 months. It tends to make these proceedings farcical. I am not going to be a party to any proceedings of that character "—an observation with which all road operators, excepting the railways, will cordially agree.