1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136 
PERSUASION' BY BR?
Page 40
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DOCUMENT SUSPECT
SIMILARITY of terminology in supporting letters by potential customers has cast doubt on the value of a British Railways submission in support of its Weat Midland application for 22 maximum-capacity artics. At a resumed hearing in Birmingham this week Mr. I. Elsei the LA, said he could not accept the submission—document 9—at face value.
The letters state the writers' understanding that to start its new Freightliner service BR must equip itself with motor vehicles. The service—Dudley to Glasgow, Newcastle and Stockton—is due to start next month.
Advocutes for 74 objectors contend that potential customers have not been made aware of the different c. and d. methods available. Mr. H. M. Sweeney, BR West Midlands sales manager, agreed that he and his 12 salesmen tried to sell a through service; they only introduced other c. and d. possibilities when the railways looked like losing the long haul. He told the LA there was 250,000 tons of suitable traffic going through the West Midlands annually—about 35,000 container loads.
Road operators have promised 80 containers a week to BR, and one objecting haulier—John Lewis and Son (B'ham) Ltd. —told the LA that long-haul traffic woillbe passed to the Freightliner.
Referring to three of the four customer witnesses who gave evidence at the previous hearing (CM, September 22), Mr. Else said it was "insulting to his intelligence" to be told that c. and d. by British Railways was more economic, when these three firms had not tested the costs of other methods.
The LA asked Mr. Sweeney how far the idea of using only BR collection and delivery was implanted in the customer's mind by his sales staff.
The hearing continues.