AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Mr. Wells suspends for 3 months

22nd December 1967
Page 18
Page 18, 22nd December 1967 — Mr. Wells suspends for 3 months
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?

SCOTTISH deputy LA, Mr. L. A. Wells, suspended for three months from Christmas Day an A licence held by the Strathtay Haulage Company Ltd., Ballinluig.

The company was called before the deputy LA in Perth last week, to show cause why the licence should not be revoked, suspended, or curtailed under Section 178 of the Act. Mr. Wells said it appeared the licence had been operated outwith "normal user" on all but one journey during the period from June 5 to September 3.

For the company, Mr. C. Smith said the present owner, Mr. G. Horne, had purchased the business in May this year. He apparently made no inquiry regarding the mystic term "normal user" and could only plead ignorance.

Mr. Wells said the licence had been issued to the Strathtay Haulage Company, which was an entity, and whether it was owned by X, Y, or Z was immaterial. "Under the new Bill it may be different," said Mr. Wells, "but under the present Act I am not concerned whether it is X, Y, or Z who is the shareholder in the Strathtay Company."

Mr. Smith said Mr. Horne did not have a haulage background—he had in fact worked on a farm. Since the letter had been received from the LA, all operations had ceased. It was a case of complete ignorance and did not show culpability and lack of respect for the authority's ruling.

Mr. Wells felt he was being as lenient as possible in suspending the licence for three months.


comments powered by Disqus