AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Booth Long-steel Appeal Dismissed

18th December 1964
Page 31
Page 31, 18th December 1964 — Booth Long-steel Appeal Dismissed
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?

WHEN a Tees-side firm of carriers YV appealed to the Transport Tribunal in London on Monday against a decision of the Northern Licensing Authority, Miss E. Havers, appearing for the firm, said it had another case pending which had been unopposed at the original application and considered that it would never be granted a licence by this

particular Authority. " It leads this appellant, in the circumstances. to suppose that it is just not possible to• succeed ", she added.

The appeal, by Arthur T. Booth Ltd. against a decision of the L.A. refusing an A licence for two artics to carry steel in excess of 35-ft. lengths to various destinations as required by the steel industry, was dismissed by the Tribunal. There were seven respondents. including the British Railways Board and British Road Services Ltd.

Miss Havers said that no customer evidence had been given at the application with the exception of letters, one of which came from Overland Services Ltd., a firm operating a clearing house. They stated that if the appellant were granted a licence for two artics, they could provide work which would keep both fully employed in carrying long lengths of steel. Their experience had shown that more vehicles were needed in the area.

At the application the Authority had taken into account previous misconduct

by the company in overloading lorries. -However, he had taken the same evidence into account at a previous application by the firm in 1963. It was not right, said Miss Havers, that the Authority should have brought this up again in 1964. She added that if the appeal were allowed, the appellant would be prepared to give up an existing licence in the North West.

Giving the Tribunal's judgment. the President, Mr. G. D. Squibb, said that the application form was defective in that it did not specify the trailers and it would be impossible to make any grant on the application which the company had made.

On the merits of the ease, the Tribunal continued, it appeared that the evidence adduced was even less satisfactory than evidence which was produced in a previous appeal when the Tribunal had found that the case was not strong enough to justify the grant sought.

Plant Hire Refused

AN application by Plant Hire Service (London) Ltd., of Ongar, Essex. for a new B licence in respect of five vehicles to carry building plant, road-making machinery, materials and equipment within 25 miles, was refused by the Metropolitan Licensing Authority, Mr. D. I. R. Muir. last week.


comments powered by Disqus