'Let's see audited accounts', say RHA objectors
Page 40
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• An application for a new operator' licence against which the Road Haulag Association had lodged an objection wa adjourned by the East Midland LA, Mr ( M. Sheridan, in Nottingham on Tuesda] after Mr A. Rotherham, representing tt RHA, had suggested that as it was in ft interests of the inquiry that the applicat firm, the Alruba Manufacturing Company 4 Burton-on-Trent, should produce auditt accounts and a list of its creditors.
The company, which is owned by tA brothers, D. J. and A. J. Johnson ar manufactures solid rubber wheels, WI applying for a licence for four vehicles ar three trailers in possession with a margin i one vehicle and four trailers to be acquirt within the first year and a further thri vehicles and five trailers over the followi five years.
As the company was not legal represented, Mr Sheridan opened tl inquiry by calling on one of the partnei Mr Robert Johnson, to give evidence regarding the company's proposed maintenance arrangements and its financial losition. Mr Johnson told the LA that each vehicle would receive a weekly maintenance nspection and would also be checked daily by ts driver. A Mr Lewis, who was not a skilled nechanic, would carry out the weekly nspections and if for any reasons these would not run to schedule a local garage would also carry out maintenance work. At his point the LA asked Mr Johnson why it lad been stated on the original application brm that vehicles would not be maintained )3( the company itself for at least a year. Mr ohnson replied that at that time the :ompany did not have the required facilities o maintain a fleet of vehicles but since then Lad acquired new premises which included wo maintenance pits and other naintenance facilities. However, a DoE ehicle examiner, Mr A. Craig, told the LA hat he had visited the premises earlier this 'ear and inspected the maintenance menities. Neither pit could be used at that me as they were covered over with piles of ubber and other than this the only maintenance equipment available were hand tools. In his opinion most of the maintenance work would be carried out in a concrete yard adjoining the depot.
Cross-examining for the RHA, Mr Rotherham asked Mr Johnson if the company or either of the partners had ever been in any financial difficulties. Mr Johnson said that neither he nor his brother had and neither had this company nor a garage which they had operated some time ago.
Mr Rotherham then asked Mr Johnson if he had ever carried out any business with Granary Haulage Ltd. After Mr Johnson had replied that he could not remember ever having done so, Mr Rotherham said that the company had carried out business with Granary Haulage Ltd and did in fact owe the firm £293. He then went on to say that other sums of money were owed to various companies and in one case a Continental haulage firm, Hammond Eves and Co, was owed a sum of money which ran into four figures.
Mr Rotherham added that numerous attempts had been made by the Herbert Detective Agency, Burton-on-Trent, and Goodeer Auden and Co. solicitors, to issue the partners with a writ regarding one of these debts. Giving evidence, Mr M. Riley, an employee of Goodeer Auden, said that he himself had met Mr Johnson. whom he recognized in court and had informed him that he had been asked to issue the writ. Mr Johnson, he said, had replied that he was in no way associated with the company and was not, in fact, called Mr Johnson at all. Eventually the writ was issued after the hearing had been adjourned.
Regarding the debt, Mr Johnson claimed that his company was not liable as these had all been incurred through transport difficulties. He explained that when transport of goods had been necessary it was on the understanding that the buyers met the cost.
At this stage in the inquiry Mr Rotherham said that as there was some doubt as to the financial stability of the company's audited accounts a list of creditors should be produced. The LA agreed and adjourned the case until some future date.