'Squeeze' kills contract
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Having had a 24-ton tanker on contract for two years, ICI Mond Division requested a Macclesfield haulier to provide a large vehicle and because of the "squeeze" said it was unable to give him a contract for the first tanker as well, and this led him to apply in Macclesfield last week to add it to his B licence.
T. W. Bayley was asking to add the 9-ton tanker to carry: "Powder in bulk for delivery by pneumatic discharge as required by ICI Mond Division." Letters from ICI Winnington and Buxton divisions were submitted stating that since they had quite a lot of these specialized vehicles on contract, breakdowns were inevitable and they could use Mr. Bayley's second vehicle on a spot hire basis.
Mr. Bayley said that he had had a 30-ton gross tanker specially built which was placed on contract with the customer but the smaller vehicle was now standing idle and would have to continue so, -until he could obtain a contract for it, if the B licence was not granted. The North Western deputy LA, Mr. A. H. Jolliffe, said that without a witness from the customer, the evidence was not strong enough for a grant.
At the same time, Bayley applied to substitute a flat /tipper with an articulated tanker on his B licence. He explained that previously he had carried silica sand in the tipper with a blower discharge, but this had become unsatisfactory where storage tanks could be located above vehicle level and up to 100ft away and it was now essential to use pneumatic discharge. Mr. Bayley said he would still wish to continue carrying steel, bricks and cement authorized on his licence.
The deputy LA pointed out that if he wished to acquire a flat vehicle with removable tank capable of carrying these other commodities, the application must be republished because the present wording was misleading. The vehicle could remain on short term licence while an amended application was submitted, he said.