Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Food vehicle marking requirements unreasonable, says TRTA

26th August 1966, Page 25
26th August 1966
Page 25
Page 25, 26th August 1966 — Food vehicle marking requirements unreasonable, says TRTA
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?

STRONG protest at requirements under new food hygiene regulations that all food delivery vehicles and mobile shops should from January 1, 1967 be marked with (a) the name and address of the person carrying on the food business, and (b) any other address at which the vehicle is kept or garaged, has been made to the Ministry of Health by the Traders Road Transport Association.

Two years ago, when these Regulations were first proposed, the TRTA commented to the Ministry of Health that these particular proposals were unnecessary and impracticable and offered to discuss the whole question. The consultation offer was not taken up by the Ministry, which proceeded direct to the Parliamentary stage with the regulations.

Because of the confusion and unnecessary problems the proposals will mean for the thousands of operators of food delivery vehicles, the TRTA has asked the Ministry of Health to make further regulations to amend these vehicle-marking requirements.

The Association appreciates that local authorities need to be able to trace the operators of food delivery vehicles and mobile shops, but feels that the normal vehicle registration system coupled with the goods vehicles licensing procedure is completely adequate for this purpose. With little exception, this principle has been acknow

ledged since the passing of the 1930 Road Traffic Act which eliminated the previous need for vehicles to carry the owner's name and address. The TRTA does not consider that there are sufficient grounds to justify the reversion to that long extinct practice.

Main criticism of the regulations, however, is directed against the requirement for the address at which the vehicle is kept and garaged to be shown. This, the TRTA believes, is both unreasonable and imprac ticable. Normal operating practice can met that a vehicle's garaging place has to changed many times during its life an furthermore, vehicles can be interchange between depots on virtually a day-to-da basis.

The exemption provided for vehicle carrying fleet numbers, the details e which are filed with the local authoritâ–  does not, in the Association's view, mater ally help matters. Although most vehicles i the larger companies' fleets carry flee numbers the difficulties arising from th interchanging of vehicles between depoi apply here equally, and the administrativ inconvenience of having to register an amend registration of fleet numbers wit local authorities is likely to seriously detrac from any merit in such an arrangement.

The TRTA has been asked to informs talks at the Health Ministry this week.

comments powered by Disqus