Kelman/Islay appeals dismissed
Page 23
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• G. and W. Kelman, trading as Kelman of Turriff and Islay Transport Services, appealed unsuccessfully to the Transport Tribunal in Edinburgh on Wednesday against two decisions of the Scottish LA in December that curtailed the licence of Kelman by nine vehicles and refused the licence application of Islay (CM February 26).
For Kelman, Mr F. H. Lefevre said the decision had not been justified by the evidence. Kelman had been called under Section 69, but the LA could have avoided taking action if satisfied that Kelman had not been failing to maintain his fleet in good order. The evidence had shown the company to be making a substantial effort and MoT evidence showed that the Turriff premises and paperwork were satisfactory although vehicles were not. Kelman had explained that illness had caused disruption but the firm had increased its labour force, bought nine vehicle replacements at a cost of 161.000 and secured new premises in Airdrie.
It was claimed that the LA had failed to have regard to the full circumstances. Mr Lefevre said that, in any case, the curtailment penalty had been too harsh.
On the Islay Transport Services appeal, Mr Lefevre was concerned with the future provision of facilities. In the Kelman of Turriff "show cause" hearing, the LA had been entitled to look at the past but an 0 application covered the position on the day of the hearing. He said the Islay A licence had been a hard one and considering the ease with which some 0 licences were now being granted there had to be very strong reasons to refuse the Islay application.
The Tribunal's reasons for dismissing the appeals will be given in writing.