"Highly Unsatisfactory" Case Referred Back to L.A.
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Transport Tribunal, sitting in Edinburgh last week, referred back to the Scottish Licensing Authority for a fuller examination an application by William Wood, of Glasgow, for four A vehicles.
For the appellant, Mr. C. E. Jauncey told the Tribunal that Wood had entered into negotiations to purchase the vehicles and the goodwill of a business; the "takeover" application had been granted, but his client did not take possession of the vehicles until 18 months after the negotiations had started.
Not Fit to be Operated Because of this delay, two of the vehicles were found to be no longer fit to be operated and the other two, after being operated for two months, were considered unsuitable. Wood purchased four other vehicles which he intended to put on the road in their place. However, in July the L.A. announced that the original grant had not been taken up and had been withdrawn.
Giving the Tribunal's judgment, Sir Hubert Hull, the president, said: "This is a highly unsatisfactory case and we don't think our decision is a very satisfactory one, but it is the best we can do."
The Tribunal were of the opinion that there should be a fuller explanation of why there had been such a delay in the transaction.
The other matter to be examined was the exact circumstances relating to what was called by the Licensing Authority a " grant " of the four vehicles on the transfer application, and the subequent withdrawal of this.
Sir Hubert would not accede to Mr. Jauncey's plea for an interim licence. He added: "We should not be surprised if the Licensing Authority thought a small grant should he made. We shall not direct such a grant."