AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

OPINIONS and QUERIES The Depreciation of Buses.

26th May 1931, Page 65
26th May 1931
Page 65
Page 66
Page 65, 26th May 1931 — OPINIONS and QUERIES The Depreciation of Buses.
Close
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?

The Editor, THE 'COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[3408] Sir,—In maintaining cost records of our buses we have, under the item "depreciation," written off each vehicle in a period of five years from its purchase, i.e., the depreciation on -a £1,000 machine would be debited against it at It per week.

Is this correct, or should we allow seven years? Further, we have several machines which, being six years old, have been depreciated altogether. Must they still be depreciated in their particular costs or would this be " nil "?

We attach a'sample running cost sheet which we use [This is not .reproduced.—ED.] and would like your comments on it. As you will note, our cost per mile for a 32-seater Leyland Lion bus for week ending April 4th is 6.05d. Is this good? What, in your opinion, should be our minimum receipts per mile to ensure a fair and reasonable profit?

Any advice you may give will be greatly appreciated, as you have "put us on the right, road" more than

once. • IkuE BIRD. Skewen.

[You are correct in writing your vehicles off over five Years and not seven years.

The Vehichs which are six years old should be debited with the amount "nil" in your accounts.

I am very interested in your running-cost sheet and, on the whole, must compliment you on the results you are obtaining with your lorries.

There are, however, one or two omissions and mistakes which, when corrected, make the total a little less favourable than would appear at first sight.

In the first place, there is an obvious error in respect of the cost of tyres, which you have set down as being only 4s. 8d. for 1,000 miles. I think there is at the very

' least an error in the placing of the detimal point tbere. ' If -your tyres last '10,000 miles, and if you can obtain one .t for £60, the co$t is 0.90d. per mile, (you give 0.0495(0. If you can make them last 24,000 miles the cost is 060d. per mile. Assuming that the actual life is midway.between these two, then the cost is 0.75d: per 'Mile, Which, for the mileage stated, is £3 10s. per _week, and not 4g. '&l.

You have also omitted any allowance for interest on first cost. That, at 4 per cent, per annum, would be 16s per week.

You must add, therefore, to your total 13 5s. 4th extra for tyres (£3 10s. minus 4s. 8d.) and 16s, for interest on first cost, that is £4 is. 4d. in all. That makes your total £32 5s. Oid. 'per week. The cost per mile thus becomes 6.9d. instead of 6.05d.

To ascertain what must be your minimum receipts per mile I must first know what your establishment expenses are. You should take these as comprising all office expenses, cost of tickets, ticket punches and maintenance of same, ticket-inspectors' wages, rent of office, cost of furniture, salaries of directors and management, salaries of office staff, ltc., etc. Add these together and divide the sum amongst the average number of buses in operation each week. Assume the total to be £7 15s. per bus, then your operating expenses, including establishment charges. amount to £40 per 'bus. A. profit of 1d. per mile on a 1,200-mile week is a further £5, which means that you must obtain a minimum revenue of £45. which is 9d. pe'r mile. If id. per mile is not sufficient, each additional id, per mile will bring you £2 10s. extra per Week.—En.-I An -Attendant on a Contract Carriage. .

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[3409] Sir.—Is it necessary for an attendant or guard "on a special bus for a special party who. have paid for this bus beforehand ".to be a "licensed guard or conductor "? This bus would be required to pick up at different points in the city members of this special party. The guard would be there solely to see the members of the party safely on the bus and would not take any money. I am a regular reader and I know that you answer these little problems. '

Manchester. Comm-omit,.

• [Section 77 of the Road Traffic Act providesthat a person shall not net as conductor of a public-service vehicle unless he be licensed for that purpose under the Act. There is no doubt that your vehicle would be a contract carriage under the Act, but on the whole it does not seem that the attendant is a conductor within the meaning of Section 77. It is, however, impossible to advise you with absolute certainty upon this point, as the Act does not contain any definition of "conductor." It occurs to us that it would be better for the attendant not to wear any uniform which might lead the police to suppose that he was acting as a conductor.—ED.] .

Stopping Access to a Garage.

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[3410].. Sir,—As a regular reader of your most interesting journal, I would like to ask your legal advice on the following matter : The lane where I live is just over a quarter of a mile long,leading on.to two second-class roads, and it was taken over by the Urban District Council many years ago.

A sewerage scheme to link up a triangle is in progress which involves one second-class road, half a mile long, which has been stopped at each end, and now they propose to block, at each end, the lane where The width of the lane at my gate at each end is 11 yds., comprising 11 ft. of very rough grass land,

12 ft. of road space and 10 ft. of grass, including .a .

dyke. . .

The road the Council is working on now is even wider, but there is barely enough'room for pedestrians to walk along, and they have not rammed 'and finished an inch for the half mile. If they do the, came in the lane by my house I shall not be able to get in or out. of my garage, in which I have a petrol pump.

THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR 530

As I am running a 5-6-ton lorry, which occasionally comes in loaded at night, and a 1-ton lorry, can I be made to stop out altogether? If so, can I claim compensation for the time and inconvenience incurred in getting the petrol and oil to the lorries?

What risk do I rim as regards my comprehensive policy because my vehicles will not be garaged at the given address?

Further, if they, cannot stop me from getting to my garage, I must first ,come one way and then the other ; in this ease my lorry. Will do a detour of over two 'miles out and tivo miles backeach day. Can I claim ,anything for this inconvenience and expense?

Coalville.

[ye presume that the local authority is laying the sewer under the powers conferred upon it by the Public Health • Act, 1875. We consider it 4uite possible that if proceedings Were brought in ihe'. High Court the authority would be • restrained from opening the whole of the road for this purpose and *Mild lie` required to do the work in two seetions so as to' allow access to your ,-garage from one. direction or the' other.

Pection 608 of the Public .Health .Act, 1875, provides that where any person sustains any damage by reason of the exercise of any of the powers of that Act, full compensation shall be made to him by the local authority and that any dispute as to the fact of damage or the amount of compensation shall be settled by arbitration in the manner provided by the Act.

In our opinion this i8 a matter in which you would be Well advised to instruct a local solicitor to take the matter up with the local authority with a view to arriving at an amicable settlement of your claim, in order to avoid the expense of arbitration proceedings. 'The solicitor will no doubt be aware of the decision of the Court of Appeal in Lingke v, Christchurch Corporation [1912], 3 KAI. 595.

With regard to your insurance policy, it is important that if you be obliged to garage the vehicle in any garage other than the-one named in the propaeal form or in the policy, you should notify the insurance company, as otherwise they would be entitled to repudiate liability in the event of the vehicle being garaged elsewhere.—En.] Attendants on Trailers.

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[3411] Sir,—We have just been fined for not having an-attendant on a four-wheeled trailer which was being drawn by a Fordson tract-r, The police sergeant who gave evidence told us afterwards that if the driver had not referred him to the head office on every question be asked he would have merely cautioned him. That, however, is a minor point and does not affect the case that we must have an extra

• man on a four-wheeled trailer. This will cut out these trailer § from being used by us, as it adds about 10th a ton to move coal by this method. We had, however, thought that a two-wheeled trailer drawn by a Fordson tractor could get out of having an attendant, under the "articulated vehicle" meaning of clause 3 in the Motor Vehicle Regulations, 1931, under a "substantial part of the weight of the trailer," although this would be a very tine point with regard to these trailers, as they are not quite the same as the ordinary six-wheeler. The solicitor happened to be sitting next -to a taxation official in the court, who spoke to him afterwards and said that even if it had been a two-wheeled trailer we should have had an attendant, and the solicitor points out that in this clause there are two words—" partial super-imposition."

We would -like to know whether this Means that we must have an attendant on a two-wheeled trailer as attached to a Fordson tractor, as if this is so it means that these will also have to be cut out from our transport, which, of course, wilt be a very expensive

business. COAL.

[There is no ,lotibt but that a Fordson tractor and trailer drawn by it cannot be regarded as being an articulated vehicle, because in order to be such a vehicle the trailer must be partitlly super-imposed upon the motor vehicle to which it is attached.

. . It is clear that under the Construction and Use Regulations which are now in force, every motor tractor must have an attendant if it be used with a trailer, unless the trailer is a closed trailer used for conveying meat between docks and railway stations or between, wholesale markets and docks or railway staZions, or unless the tractor is drawing any machine or implement used for the purpose of the maintenance; repair or cleaning of roads. Those are the only two exceptions which' are mentienedin No. 77 of the Construction and Use RegulatiOns. it is immaterial Whether the trailer has four wheels or two -wheels. The only case in which a two-wheeled trailer can be used without an attendant, except in the case of an articulated vehicle, is where the trailer is drawn by a motorcar or a "motorcycle'. A motor tractor, however, is not a .motorcar. EV.Cu if the weight unladen does not exceed 2i tons. because a Motorcar ..is defined in section 2 (1) (e) of the Road Traffic Act as being a mechanically propelled vehicle which is constructed itself to carry a load or passengers',, and the weight of winch unladen, in the case of a goods vehicle, does not exceed 2; tons. On the other band. a . motor, tractor is defined as being a mechanically propelled vehicle which is not Constructed itself to Carry any load, .and the 'weight of which unladen does not exceed 71 tons.

'Our legal adviser suggests that the difficulty might be overcome if a Fordson tractor could be constructed with a platform roof in order to enabk a load to be carried on the roof, whethar a trailer were drawn by it or not. If a

tractor" constructed in that Manner had a weight unladen not exceeding 21, tons it would cease to be a tractor and would be a motorcar, in which rase a two-wheeled trailer could be used, without an attendant. It would, of coarse, be necessary to comply with the provisions of Regulation 62 as to safe loading. It would also he necessary to register and licence the vehicle as a motorcar and not as a traetor.—End Emergency Doors on Coaches.

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[34121 Sir,—Further to the article on eoachbuilding in your issue of March 24th and to Regulation 30 in Statutory Rules and Orders, 1931, No. 62, may we have .your opinion as to whether the door of a sun saloon 20-seater coach, as shown in the sketch [which we reproduce,—ED.1, meets with the requirements.

Yarmouth. EMERGENCY.

[Statutory Rules and Orders, 1931,-No. 62, are revoked by Provisional Rules and Orders, 1931, of March 13th. Regulation 30, however, reads much the same, excent that the driver's off-side door is not obligatory until January 1st, 1032, and. a sub-paragraph is added with reference to the doorWays of vehicles with not more than 14 seats. From the sketch submitted it would appear that the driver's off-side door is satisfactory, but the placing of the front near-side seat, with its front edge in line With the doorway, causes the passengers using it to obstruct the doarway.• This seat should be set back. No inforMation Is given regarding the seating plan at the rear side doorWay, where it may be more convenient to arrange' an unobstructed doorway of not less than 18 inn • Such a rear entrancela all that is necessary for a vehicle registered on Or before January 1st, 1932.--En.l


comments powered by Disqus