Three Appeals Heard in London by Transport Tribunal
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
"TRIED TO GET INTO PARCELS TRADE"
A FIRM of hauliers tried to get a tilicence to carry goods in containers arriving at Felixstowe from the Continent so they could "get their feet" into the ordinary parcels traffic in East. Anglia, the Transport Tribunal was told • in... London last week.
Three other haulage concerns were appealing against the granting by the Eastern Licensing Authority of an A licence to East Anglian Carriers, Ltd., of London and Bury St. Edmunds, for a 31-ton vehicle based at Bury St. Edmunds, niainly to carry goods in containers for the General Steam Navigation Co., to and from Felixstowe.
The three appellants were: Warners Transport, of Bury St. Edmunds, C. J. H. Smith, of Barrow, near Bury St. Edmunds, and C. B. Taylor, • of Barnham, near
thetford.
The Tribunal's decision will be announced later.
Mr. M. D. Van Oss, for the three appellants, said there had been a similar applieation in 1960, which was refused because Of the unsatisfactory form of the normal user detlaration.
The second application, the subject of the appeal, was conducted rather on the basis that "everything was over bar the shouting," and it was merely a question of the declaration being put in order for the application to go through, he said. The grounds of the appeal were that the Authority based his decision on evidence at the earlier hearing.
"What these people are really after is to get their feet well into the ordinary parcel traffic in this area. It is a wedge that soon becomes a good deal broader than appears at first."
The application should have been made at Felixstowe, and not Bury St. Edmunds. If it had been, there might have been Dbjections from people there.
Mr. C. R. Beddington, for East Anglian Carriers. Ltd., said none of the objectors was in a position to offer any regular service at all, and there was no other contractor apparently able to offer any facilities of the kind required.
IGNORING BRISTOL CHANNEL? TWO Gloucestershire hauliers appealed
unsuccessfully to the Transport Tribunal in London last week against the rant of an extra A-licence vehicle to a erefordshire operator by the West idland deputy Licensing Authority, he appellants, George Read (Transport), td., of IVIitcheidean, and W. G. Golding nd Sons, Ltd., of Wotton-under-Edge, ere chiefly concerned that the 100-mile adius granted with the A licence meant hat Powells Transport, Ltd., of Sutton t. Nicholas could run this bulk grain chicle into Gloucestershire. They subitted that this aspect of the grant ignored the existence of the Bristol Channel " and that traffic originating east of the natural barrier of the Severn should have been excluded from the normal operations. "
The President, Sir Hubert Hull, thought it was •a very, narrowly balanced matter, but, On the whole, the evidence indicated that there was likely to be an extension in the carriage of feeding stuffs to broilers and egg-producing stations.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal.
B LICENCE APPLICATION TO BE REHEARD • THE Transport Tribunal last week I ordered that an application which the Metropolitan deputy Licensing Authority had refused without bearing the evidence of the objectors should be reheard by the Authority.
The Tribunal were hearing an appeal by Victor Bearman against a decision not to grant him H licences for four tipper vehicles, restricted to carrying rubbish and building materials within 25 miles of Longfield Railway Station, Kent.
The Tribunal ruled that, pending the rehearing, a short-term licence should be issued to Mr. Bearman.