AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Haulier's Evidence Criticized

20th April 1962, Page 36
20th April 1962
Page 36
Page 36, 20th April 1962 — Haulier's Evidence Criticized
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?

D EPRESENTATIONS refuting a state

ment made at an earlier hearing were put forward by F. S. Needeth, transport manager of the Hulland Gravel Co., Ltd., to the West Midland Licensing Authority, Mr. J. Else, at Hanley last Friday. Mr. Needeth referred to a report which appeared in The Commercial Motor on March 2, relating to an application by Mr. W. 0. Fry, of Stoke-onTrent, for a new B licence, and recorded how Hulland Gravel had been criticized because they had not sent a witness to court to support the operator.

Mr. Needeth stated that they were "very concerned" on seeing the report as they had never been asked to attend a public inquiry, and did not even know Mr. Fry was making an application. Their business was very competitive and he did not accept that the comments made at the hearing regarding low rates were in any way justified.

Mr. G. Tinsdill, appearing for Mr. Fry, stated that on the occasion of the B application no remarks which could have been offensive to Hulland Gravel had arisen in examination-in-chief.

When asked by the Licensing Authority to clarify the matter, Mr. Fry said that his previous evidence had been based on assumption rather than on fact. Hulland Gravel had not been asked to support him. However, their business relationship had always been good, and he hoped this would continue. Mr. Else asked him to bear in mind that true, factual evidence must always be given, not details based on his own impressions. Attention was drawn by Mr. Needeth to comments made by Mr. R. Hall, the West Midland Deputy Licensing Authority, on the last occasion. He had said that his attitude to firms who would not, as a matter of policy, send witnesses to traffic courts was that he would not consider their traffic needs.

Mr. Else said he considered this to be a fair attitude in the circumstances of the previous hearing and assured Mr. Needeth that the Authoritywould not be prejudiced when considering any future requests for transport by Hulland Gravel.


comments powered by Disqus