AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Bid to Stop Illegal Private Parties

22nd February 1957
Page 32
Page 32, 22nd February 1957 — Bid to Stop Illegal Private Parties
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?

Keywords : Business / Finance

I N view of the illegal operation of

so-called private parties by unlicensed operators in the area, the applicants were seeking to add to their Fleetwood licence an eight-day tour to south-west' Scotland for May 19 only. The application had been agreed by Ribble Motor Services, Ltd., and the railways, and supported a policy for authorized extended-tour operators to apply for a one-year licence for semi-private parties.

Mr. H. Backhouse said this on behalf of Batty-Holt Touring Services, Ltd., Blackpool, before the North Western Traffic Commissioners, at Southport, last week.

Mr. Backhouse said Bauy-Holt had been approached by Mr. W. Barton, a Blackpool hotelier, on behalf of a number of hotel and boarding-house proprietors, to run two coaches to Skelmorlie.

Objecting for James Smith and Co. (Wigan), Ltd., Mr. F. Webster, managing director, alleged that Batty-Wilt had obtained Mr. Barton's business by price-cutting. His company bad done the work in 1956. Questioning Mr. A. Bolton, a director of Batty-Holt, Mr. Webster said he suspected that tours had been operated in excess of their licence.

Mr. Backhouse replied that additional tours had been run under dispensation from the Traffic Commissioners. The application, he added, was taking about £30 profit from the tour. Such opposition would deter applications of this sort, and make private parties drift back to unlicensed operators.

There was no evidence to support the allegation of price-cutting, and they cauld not establish the principle that an operator who had carried a party once must continue to do so.

Mr. F. Williamson, chairman, said Mr. Webster's objection was valid and he was entitled to pursue it. In view of the allegations, it would have been desirable to have had Mr. Barton as a witness, but he was said to be On this occasion, the application would be granted. but Mr. Barton must give evidence in any future application, Mr. Williamson added that it would be to the operators' own advantage to get together on the lines suggested by R


comments powered by Disqus