AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

HE CRIME AGAINST THE LICENCE

1st October 1965, Page 79
1st October 1965
Page 79
Page 79, 1st October 1965 — HE CRIME AGAINST THE LICENCE
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?

)NLY a handful of licences were revoked and a few more suspended during the 12 months up to the end of September 1964, according to the reports of the Licensing thorities for that year. The most frequent offence was failure fulfil an intention expressed when obtaining the grant of an A B licence. There was one suspension of three vehicles for aches of licence conditions and two revocations and seven pensions involving 13 vehicles in all for contravention of the tutory provisions governing road safety.

t is the last point which has been by critics of road transport as a idalous example of the failure of law to deal with the owner of defective vehicles. The greater iuency with which some Licensing horities are now taking licences iy because the vehicles have been id wanting may be a reflection of lic concern. l'he continuation of tide checks is keeping up the sure.

PENALTIES ARE INADEQUATE

Oyer forms of punishment are nos!. Less attention has been drawn he comparatively large number of ;ecutions under the Construction Use Regulations, even a year ago .n there were 4,000 convictions. re seems a general belief, however,

the fines and other penalties osed are inadequate and not a :rrent and that the only way to deal a delinquent operator is to deprive of the right to run the vehicles zh he so grossly neglects.

fhether this belief is justified or

it is linked with a largely xpressed opinion that the crime nst the vehicle is many times more )US than the crime against the Ice. The possession of a badly ntained and therefore dangerous cle brings with it a social stigma: comparison the carriage of goods out the appropriate licence seems ely a peccadillo or even an Iligent anticipation of Geddes. The that there are rather more convics for this type of offence than for ctive:vehicles may well be regarded the public as evidence that the .rcement procedure concentrates on wrong things.

s I haversaid: the opinion is seldom .essed in so many words. But most people, if the point were put to them, would be likely to say that it is better to have a score of vehicles running without licences than even one vehicle with inadequate brakes. The argument is that the defective vehicle is a dangerous vehicle whereas the unauthorised carriage of goods is a harmless buccaneering exploit against a heavily protected vested interest. Superficially it may seem a convincing line of reasoning.

Nobody, however, has bothered to find out to what extent defective vehicles are actually responsible for accidents. Not every vehicle will be involved but it must certainly be the case that every unauthorized journey is depriving some lawful operator of traffic.

No estimate has been made of the volume of goods carried outside the law. Detection cannot be easy and the number of journeys must be many times the number of prosecutions. The money syphoned away from established hauliers might well be enough to cover the cost of a substantial maintenance programme. Apart from this it is a reasonable assumption that the operator who is not particular about the traffic he carries will be no more particular about the condition of his vehicles.

Hauliers who would like to see more stress laid on abuses of the licensing system will be encouraged by what is happening in the USA. President Johnson has recently signed a Bill providing for voluntary machinery designed to stop the illegal " transportation racket " which is said to amount to as much as, if not more than, £1,000m. a year.

Among other things the measure will increase the power of the Interstate Conimerce Commission to take legal action against the unlicensed operator; make it easier for the

Commission to serve summonses on suspected offenders and their confederates; and provide for agreements between the Federal and State governments to enforce the economic and safety laws controlling road transport operation.

There is no doubt that the authorities as well as operators in the US are anxious that action should be taken against illegal practices. In addition there is no hesitation on the part of the operators to assist the law by providing information based on their own inquiries.

CARRIERS FORMED COMMITTEE IN US In 1960, the carriers of general traffic in the US formed a committee on transportation practices to find examples and challenge the operators concerned before the ICC. Trained investigators have been employed and it is claimed that as a result of their efforts a number of major transport companies have been ordered to cease evading Federal law and several others have gone out of business on finding that their activities were being made the subject of investigation. The customers whose traffic was being carried are said to include firms with household names.

The law in the US is in some ways stricter than in the UK. Although the holder of a licence or its equivalent may put as many vehicles on the road as he pleases, he is entitled to serve only a specified area or even a specified route and there is statutory control of his rates. When the law covers a wider field there are obviously many more ways in which it can be broken. The most frequent offences are said to be against the regulations fixing rates. Nevertheless, if .operators in the US find it worth while employing staff to find information -about infringements, British hauliers might at least examine. the situation here and try to discover how much traffic, they are losing each year to illegal rivals.

Janus

Tags

People: Johnson

comments powered by Disqus