Same-day Delivery Argued
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE question whether customers who purchased furniture at sales and auctions in country districts were reasonably entitled to expect hauliers to provide same-day delivery was argued before the North Western Licensing Authority, Mr. I, R. Lindsay, at Liverpool on Tuesday, when Mr. J. F. Doyle, Southport, applied for a new B licence for a furniture van of 2 tons unladen weight.
William Howard and Sons (Southport), Ltd., Waring and Gillow (Southport), Ltd., Walter Carter (Harrods), Ltd., Messrs. C. Grimley and Sons, County Motor Services, Messrs. I. Crossley and the British Transport Commission objected.
Mr. E. A. Whitehead, for the applicant, said he was a furniture dealer with premises in Southport and Ormskirk. The vehicle, at present on C licence, was essential for the collection and delivery of his own furniture, but was only , employed two days a week.
. There had been many requests to carry for hire or reward from sales in the country districts around Ormsicirk, where transport facilities were inadequate.
Mr. L. J. Metcalf, a Southport antique dealer, questioned by Mr. A. Hull, for the objectors, denied that auctioneers were normally prepared to keep goods for 48 hours, and said many required them moved the same day.
There was an over-abundance of this type of transport in Southport already, said Mi.. Hull. Twenty-seven Aand 24 B-licensed vehicles were available for furniture carrying, and five concentrated on collection and delivery of small lots of furniture in the district. Dealers could not expect a fleet of vehicles waiting for work at country sales.
Mr. Whitehead submitted that if the Authority were inclined to find against the applicant, he should reserve decision to consider the Travers appeal case. He had deliberately adduced evidence in fine with this case and proved that the applicant had a genuine business, that he needed his own vehicle, and that it was uneconomical to run unless licensed for hire or reward.
The Tribunal had said that it-was not in the public interest to refuse such an application, and he had called five customers who were willing to employ Mr. Doyle.
Refusing the application, Mr. Lindsay said he was satisfied there was adequate transport. available, which the witnesses had not seen fit to seek out.