No Grant for Longer.
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
and Heavier Trailer
AN attempt by a Tees-side firm of hauliers to enter the longer-length. steel• carrying held was unsuccessful last week at •Darlington when H. L. Walker. Ltd., of Thornaby-on-Tees, who applied to have an articulated vehicle transferred from special A to an A licence, were refused permission to operate a longer and heavier trailer than originally specified.
Mr. Alfred Darley, manager and secre:ary of H, L. Walker, said they wished the vehicle to join their fleet with a 1,eneral normal user, but special mention ning made of the carriage of long Lengths, which the vehicle was at present arrying.
Asked by Mr, T. H. Campbell Ward' Law, for Sunter Brothers and Siddle C. Cook, Ltd., objectors, what type of vehicle it Was, Mr. Darley said it was an articulated 'vehicle, though it had been thown in the application form as a tractor and trailer. Asked if the outfit would comply with the Motor Vehicles ;Construction and Use) Regulations, Mr. Darley said that it would as regards gross tonnage. The trailer was extendible up to a length of 50 ft.
No Undertaking He agreed that his company had made applications before to operate vehicles to carry long lengths, which were unsuccessful. 'Asked if he was prepared to give an undertaking that the trailer -would not ;,:xceed 25 ft., as had been done at a previous application, Mr. Darley said: No, because it is already carrying in excess of that."
Asked by Mr. Wardlaw if he agreed that the trailer portion of an articulated vehicle was, in effect, married to thc tractor, Mr. Darley would not agree. Mr. Darley said that for licensing it was treated as two vehicles. He understood that it was well thrashed out in the industry that special A trailer weights were not specified.
The weight of .the trailer authorized on the licence was not stated, continued Mr. Darley.
Couldn't Understand It
Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, . Northern Licensing Authority, looking at the files, confirmed this, and said he did not understand why it had been allowed, to pass unnoticed. According to the records, the applicants had acquired the .vehicle and made application for it on November. 25, 1959, and on the same day another vehicle was put on the licence.. Explained Mr. Darley: "It had been in an .aceident and was out of commission."
In other words," said Mr. Hanlon, "they bought this scrap vehicle and never used it but immediately put on another vehicle."
Giving his decision, Mr. Hanlon said that as the application was to convert a special A into an ordinary A vehicle, he would grant the applicants a vehicle of the type and weight originally authorized when they purchased the unit, not exceeding 25 ft. in length as regards, the trailer, the total overall length of the vehicle not to exceed 35 ft.