COUNTRYWIDE THC UNDERTAKING ON CAR TRANSPORTERS
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
0 N behalf of Furness and Parker Ltd., British Road Services and all Transport Holding Company-owned subsidiaries, together with Progressive Deliveries Ltd., Mr. J. S. Lawton gave an undertaking in Liverpool last week that these companies would not object to B-licence applications by Silcock and Coiling Ltd. with an agreed amended wording in any traffic area.
Silcock and Coiling, of Dagenham, Essex, was applying for 50 articulated car transporters of 9+ tons each to operate from a base at Ford Site, Halewood, under B licence.
After an adjournment, Mr. M. H. JacksonLipkin, for the firm, told the North Western deputy LA, Mr. G. Newman, that it had agreed with the objectors the following normal user: "Completely assembled motor vehicles, body shells, accessories and spare parts from the Ford Motor Co. Ltd. and to and from their dealers and bodybuilders and for vehicle transporter operators other than associated and subsidiary companies of the licensee, Great Britain".
Mr. V. A. Saunders, objecting on behalf of Sutcliffe Express Services Ltd. and Geo. Davies and Son Ltd., said they also withdrew their objection subject to the amended wording.
Earlier, Mr. Jackson-Lipkin had told the LA that if these 50 vehicles were granted the company would give an undertaking to apply immediately to the Metropolitan LA for a public inquiry to be held to see what vehicles should be removed from the 26-vehicle licence granted in that area. At that inquiry the company would bring forward evidence to support the retention of seven vehicles in connection with its new rail depot opening at Maidenhead in eight weeks' time.
Giving evidence, Mr. G. H. Coiling, managing director of Silcock and Coiling, said that it had negotiated an agreement in February with the Transport and General Workers Union for the introduction of a further 100 car transporters and the subsequent payment of redundancy money or the implementation of retraining programmes for plate drivers. The transporters held an average of five cars and carried out 1.5 trips a day whereas plate drivers could undertake an average of 2.2 trips a day.
His company handled all Ford's export car delivery work in this country and 80 per cent of domestic distribution. In September 1965 Ford made its selling prices inclusive of delivery charges and thus became responsible for the cars until they reached the distributors. Ford had therefore decided on a policy of delivery by transporters rather than by plate drivers. Another point, said Mr. Coiling, was that the purchaser liked to buy a new car with the minimum mileage on the clock.
He explained that sub-contracting was not satisfactory because if the contractor's driver failed to return a receipted delivery note his firm could suffer loss because Ford would not pay without its production. In support of his contention that transporters were difficult to hire, Mr. Coiling produced a roll of telex messages from contractors unable to assist.
At the end of the hearing, Mr. Coiling confirmed that his company would be happy to continue working with Furness and Parker.