Five Portolite Ta nkers for Suttons
Page 42
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AFTER describing an application as ambitious, and saying that it would not have a marked effect on rates, Mr. F. Williamson, representing the North Western Licensing Authority, partially granted an application by Sutton and Son (St. Helens), Ltd.. at Manchester last week.
He authorized an A licence for five dual-purpose vehicles able to carry collapsible tanks.
The original request had been for 12 of these units, but Mr. Williamson added that, although he was convinced thest new tankers were a practical propositior 12 was too large a figure. The gran: would enable experimental operation tc be carried out and if these were satisfactory, more could be applied for.
Mr. J. W. Finnis, objecting fol Pickfords, Ltd.. detailed Unilever traffic they had lost over the past few years. It the application were granted, he said, this traffic would be further reduced.
The traffic manager of Bulwark Transport, Ltd., also objecting, said that overall they had 14.62% vehicle availability. Sometimes 20 tankers a day were idle.
Mr. G. P. Crowe, objecting on behalf of Bulwark Transport, admitted that they were frightened by the possibilities of abstraction of traffic. The spoilt children of the industry, he contended, were the transport managers of large organizations who selected their own hauliers. The smaller fry in haulage were not so important, but it was they who would suffer.
Suttons did not propose to carry any new traffic, but only that which had been transferred from other vehicles, declared Mr. J. Booth, objecting for the B.T.C. Suttons were, in fact, saying: "If you will give us your traffic, we will reduce our rates." This was the basis of the application and was the reason why so many people wanted to use the new vehicles. But existing operators would be penalized and would lose traffic.