Opinions and Queries
Page 54
Page 57
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Don't Forget B.R.S. Engineers
I WAS extremely interested in the leading article "The Unfortunate In-betweens," published in the January 1 issue of The Commercial Motor, which dealt with the prospects of district and group managers and depot superintendents of British Road Services subsequent to denationalization.
I was somewhat surprised, however, that no mention, was made of the ultimate fate of the engineers employed, which can, at the least, be no better than that of the staff mentioned by you, and which may, in some instances, be even more precarious.
There are many, like the writer, who, because they were in control of reputable and sizeable fleets on nationalization, were promoted—although without a commensurate increase in salary—to the posts of assistant or district engineers, where the responsibilities involved covered fleets of over 1,000 vehicles and repair centres with staffs of up to 100.
Most of us, not unnaturally, are past middle age and with the prospect of all or most of our vehicles \ being sold in small lots we cannot help but view the future with a very jaundiced eye.
The creation of British Transport Commission companies would do little to solve the problem, as the number of engineers is large and the posts available will be few.
Nor should the clerical personnel attendant upon the district engineer be forgotten. It is unlikely that purchasers of transport units will keep records to the extent or in the detail that the B.R.S. have, and here again the future looks none too bright.
As regards depot and group maintenance personnel, here the likelihood of continued employment is much greater. Generally speaking, these men are ex-chargehands and foremen and purchasers of small fleets will naturally look here for their workshops staff.
I am, at the moment, controlling two repair centres in the Metropolitan area and a fleet of 1,100 vehicles, but I envisage that all but 100 or so of these will disappear if sales run to schedule.
London. Engineer, General Services, British Road Services.
Help for the P.D.S.A.?
HAVING just read your issue of December 25, its perusal being delayed by the holiday, I would like to congratulate you on the excellently written article
21 P.D.S.A. Vehicles Treat 160,000 Animals a Year." As possibly like many of your other readers, I had not previously realized that such great work was performed ,through the medium of the motor ambulances used by the People's Dispensary For Sick Animals.
The exacting work which these vehicles have performed is a tribute to British engineering skill and workmanship, but also one begins to realize that it is only through the sacrifices of the few that such merciful work, so quietly carried out, is done at all.
The obvious need for more vehicles to meet the requirements of the P.D.S.A. inspires me to suggest that, given a lead, many readers of The Commercial Motor might be happy to contribute towards an additional vehicle. In fact, it would be a fine gesture if your readers could present a complete new ambulance, to 1320 be known as " The Commercial Motor Readers' Ambulance." Is this being too optimistic? Surely not; vast sums have been raised for less deserving causes. • A log book of the errands of mercy performed by this ambulance could no doubt be kept and a summary of its activities periodically noted in your journal. These Would, no doubt, be followed with interest.
I feel certain that, with the blessing of your journal, the scheme would be a success, and I would be most happy, although a small person in the monetary sense, to start the fund with a subscription of £2 2s., provided that I remained incognito.
Strawberry Hill, Middlesex. ENTHUSIAST.
[No doubt many readers of The Commercial Motor who are fond of animals will appreciate the suggestion made by this correspondent and there is no doubt that the P.D.S.A. would welcome any contributions which they would like to make. It is, however, outside the province of this journal to act as a collector for any specific association, particularly one not immediately concerned with the industry which it represents. It would be advisable, therefore, for any subscriptions to be sent direct to the P.D.S.A., at 31 Cork Street, London, W.I. There would, of course, be no objection to donors describing themselves as readers of The Commercial Motor.2—ED.1
An Insurance-claim Problem
ABOUT a year ago I started as an owner-driver
haulier by buying a small business, including the B licence concerned. Having spent several years in the motor trade 1 was able to devote my free hours for nearly two months to overhauling the only vehicle that was suitable.
After much effort I was then able to obtain work hauling coal for hospitals, factories, etc. I was a little handicapped by the age of my vehicle, it being a tipper of the hand-operated tyPe, but nevertheless in good running condition and of reasonable appearance.
Later, I tendered for contract work and was successful. I had just begun to welcome and appreciate the arrival of the cheques and .my vehicle was giving practically no trouble, when I became involved in an accident which was almost a knock-out blow to me, although the learner-driver concerned admitted to the police that he was to blame. My lorry was towed to a local garage, which arranged to estimate the damage and the cost of the repairs required.
Unfortunately I was insured under third-party risk only, but I consulted a solicitor and notice was sent to the ,other driver's insurance company suggesting that they were responsible for making good the damage and for loss of earnings, etc: Three weeks later a representative of the company arrived at the garage and agreement was reached in respect of repairs and costs.
About a week later I received a letter from my solicitor saying that the insurance company had no objection to repairs being started. This, however, was followed by a further letter saying that the company . were of the opinion that it was uneconomic to repair. the vehicle and, as its market value was only about 175, they would offer me this amount in settlement of the vehicle claim, whilst any amount due for loss of earnings could be met by my retaining the salvage value of the vehicle.
By this time the garage had completed repairs amounting to £50, and although there was still much work to be done and I felt it ridiculous to sell the vehicle, as its salvage value had not appreciated much by these repairs and their cost had to be met. I therefore felt that the offer could not be accepted for, apart from its inadequacy, the delaying tactics had already lost me many weeks of earnings.
Further efforts to obtain an increase made no headway, but on receiving an account from the garage the insurance company decided to send a representative to discuss the matter.
Meanwhile, I had been unable to hire a suitable lorry and the cost involved would have been more than I could have claimed in respect of loss of earnings, so that the weeks of waiting became months. Then the insurance representative called and, after seeing my solicitor, went direct to the garage and suggested that sufficient repairs should be completed to meet a figure well below that previously agreed.
The garage manager said that he would review the position and explained that the vehicle cOuld not be repaired to a condition comparable with that of its pre-accident state at any amount under the earlier estimate.
It was then agreed between me and my solicitor that full repairs should be completed and the account for this, plus my claim for loss of earnings, was sent to the insurance company. My solicitor added that if no satisfaction was obtained, legal action would be taken.
It is 12 weeks since the accident occurred and I have suffered considerable financial loss and mental strain, for when I bought the business it took all my savings, but the licence was valuable and I could see a fairly bright future if I worked hard.
Reading. HARASSED.
[We assume that the question of liability for the accident was established 100 per cent in Harassed's favour. In that event he is entitled to have the vehicle, which was in good running order, put into the sanit.• condition as it was immediately before the accident. If that costs the insurance company more than the value of the vehicle, that is just unfortunate for them. They are not entitled to say, " Oh well it is not worth repairing anyway." It sometimes happens that tricky questions arise when a very old vehicle is involved in an accident and to put right the damage caused it is necessary' to do additional work because of the defective condition of the rest of the vehicle not directly resulting from the accident. That does not appear to be the case here. As regards loss of earnings the rule is that the victim of any accident is under a duty to minimize his losses. In such cases therefore he should, where appropriate, hire whatever equipment is necessary for him to carry on. Inability, through lack of funds to do so, is no excuse in law, for it has been said that the law of damages is "one a restitution, not destitution." In other words, any loss of earnings resulting directly from the vietim's own poor financial position cannot he recovered. However, if the cost of hiring another vehicle to continue the normal work would have exceeded the amount of the earnings attributed to its use, then this question does not arise and he would; in our view, be entitled to claim the whole sum representing the lower loss of earnings.
It would be wrong to advise direct on the facts of this case or the correct line to take, as Harassed is in the hands of a solicitor. However, if the insnrance company do not see reasein in the matter—and one must realize that where they are dealing with a claim made against their assured and not with one made by the latter against them directly, their main object is to whittle it down and to pay out as little as they can get away with— the only course open, as the solicitor has advised, i to sue the motorist If then successful, Harassed will' be awarded (a) the cost of repairs actually carried out on the vehicle; (b) loss of earnings and out-of-pocket expenses incurred; (c) a sum—often rather nominal—to cover general inconvenience arising from the loss of the vehicle not directly assessable in terms of money.—ED.]
Not a True Picture
IN your annual review of municipal transport (Decem ber 11 issue) you asked if the increase of nine in the trolleybus total since your previous review indicated a return to favour of this type of vehicle. I suggest it does not.
Your review does not include the figures for privatecompany fleets and is, therefore, not the full story: It would, I suppose, be impossible to include details of every private operator in the British Isles who rqns motorbuses and illogical to include only private trolleybus, operators to the exclusion of motorbus operators.
I believe I am right in saying that the two company trolleybus fleets abandoned had between them a total of 59 vehicles, 27 at Llaneliy and 32 at Notts and Derby. Assuming no significant changes in the other four companies' totals and in that for London Transport, there appears to be a net reduction of about 50 for the year.
Although I have not the previous two years' figures by Me, I seem to recall that they were not greatly different from this figure. The change this year just -happened to be external to your report.
When preparing your next year's summary, perhaps you could consider a supplement to your table to include the company and London Transport figures for trolleybuses, so as to give the overall picture.
Leaving aside the question of actual figures it seems to me, as an interested observer outside the industry, that there is no firm trend to give guidance on the future. Whilst Bradford, Wolverhampton, Walsall, Brighton, Maidstone, Derby, Newcastle, Cardiff, Glasgow and Belfast have extended their systems since 'the end of the war, Birmingham, St. Helens, Darlington, Rotherham and West Hartlepool have reduced or abandoned their's.
Of the remaining tramway systems only that at Glasgow appears to be likely to be replaced by trolleybuseS.
Meanwhile, Southend and Doncaster talk of abandon. ment and reduction, Manchester and others replace only what is obsolete, and yet others do not renew their equipment. So, on balance, where do we go from here?
Wollaton Park, Nottingham. C. W. SEX.
Very Special Occasions
I KNOW a coach operator whose sole work is private I hire for the ordinary folk in this district. They organize parties and to them these are indeed very special occasions.
Now the " occasions " are visits to London for •a theatre or circus or to shows in towns such as Luton and Northampton. During summer they arrange outings to the seaside, whilst there are always parties to sporting events. These people are usually ignorant of the whole legal aspect of coaching.
I think this ought to be the angle from which this vexing question should be viewed. The events may not legally be "special occasions," but for the people who hire coaches for them, they are certainly very special.
Bletchley, Bucks. A. J. PARRIS.