AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

A CAUTIONARY TALE

21st June 2001, Page 32
21st June 2001
Page 32
Page 32, 21st June 2001 — A CAUTIONARY TALE
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?

• Any haulier thinking he might expand his existing site as an alternative to moving should consider John Burgess's tale. He runs building material specialist haulier CJ Burgess & Sons in East Sussex, but a few years ago he wondered whether there was any point in carrying on.

"I applied to extend my 0-licence by half a dozen trucks and immediately came up against a local resident who was hell-bent on stopping me," he says. "He had bought his house near to our yard two or three years earlier, knowing we were there, but I think he would have done anything to shut us down."

Following the objection, a public inquiry was called. Burgess was forced to hire a solicitor to represent him—his objector had engaged the services of a barrister who successfully argued that he should not be allowed to base more vehicles on the site. After having his appeal turned down at a second inquiry, Burgess faced being restricted to operating between 07:00-18:00hrs although this never actually happened after his MP intervened on his behalf.

"The whole thing cost me around £45,000 and a lot of lost sleep—and the man who objected sold up and moved out of the area recently," he says. "What it does mean is that I will never be able to increase the size of my base here—I've now got two other operating centres elsewhere and base the extra vehicles there."

Tags

People: John Burgess

comments powered by Disqus