Looking at licensing No. 14 by lain Sherriff
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
How the LA Decides
• If there are no objections to an application for special authorization the LA will grant it automatically. Similarly if an objection is made to any part of a journey proposed to be made under special authorization, the LA will make a grant in respect of that part of the journey which is not in dispute. This is the essence of Section 74 of the Transport Bill.
At present the LA has discretionary power to refuse applications for new or varied licenses. Even without objectors he can refuse an application on the evidence produced to support an application. If the Bill becomes law this discretionary power will not apply in respect of special authorizations. While it is clear how he will treat an undisputed application, it is not so immediately apparent how he will deal with a partly disputed service.
The only parties with the right to object are the British Railways Board and National Freight Corporation on behalf of its proposed Freightliner service. It is conceivable that either party might well object to part of a journey between, say, Oban and Ipswich. The objection would be to that part of the journey which they consider could best be served by rail. If this were so then the LA would require to grant a special authorization for the remainder of the journey.
However, if an objection is made to the whole or any part of a journey, before a grant the LA must be satisfied that it will be less advantageous to the customer if the objection is upheld. That is to say, if the customer can be equally satisfied by road or rail then the application must be refused.
The factors on which the LA will draw comparisons between the road and rail services are speed, reliability and cost. These factors will be directly comparable—for example, the speed will be calculated on the time taken from the collection point to the delivery point and will take account of terminal delays. It is unlikely that any LA will blindly accept intended schedules.
In the same way, reliability cannot be assumed; arguments in this field must be based on what is fact. With regard to cost, the objectors are required to submit to the LA a statement of their charges for comparison with the applicant's charges.
The LA will assess the factors in accordance with any directions contained in regulations made by the Minister. Quite what these regulations will be no one knows but it means that the LA can be guided on how he makes his assessment.
In making his assessment the LA will consider the importance of speed, reliability and cost to the needs of the person for whom the goods are to be carried and to the nature of those goods. It is apparent that where goods are scheduled to reach a market at a specific time, speed and reliability will be high in the LA's assessment.
At first sight one may take the view that the rate per ton is the only factor to be considered when examining costs. However, there are other factors; if goods have to be held in Warehouse pending collection or after delivery awaiting distribution then the cost of warehousing must be considered as part of the transport cost. If goods are perishable and one service quotes for a refrigerated container against a non-refrigerated container, then this will be considered by the LA. The refrigerated unit may be dearer but more suitable considering the nature of the goods.
The NFC is treated in the same way as a private road haulier in respect of applying for special authorizations, in that it or its subsidiaries require to make application to the LA. Such applications are open to objection by British Railways or NFC's Freightliner service.
However, the grant of such an application is not so simple. If there is no objection the LA does not make an automatic grant as he is required to do in the private sector. He must consider if he would have made a grant had an objection been raised. To assist him in this consideration he may call on either of the two statutory objectors to supply such information and explanation as he may need in coming to a decision.
For example, if an application by a private operator for a special authorization for, say, Manchester—London is successfully opposed by one of the rail services and then a similar application by NFC or one of its subsidiaries is unopposed, the LA will want to know why.
The LA is not expected to make his assessment unaided. The Minister is to appoint a panel of assessors on whom the LA can call.
It is important to understand that special authorizations apply to own-account (Clicence) work in the same way as they do to hire and reward work. So that where the Bill talks of charges it in fact means the cost of carriage whether or not it is being recharged.
To summarize: Provided no objections are raised the LA is required to grant an application for a special authorization except where the application is made by the road section of NFC. He must then consider it as if an objection had been made. Objections can be raised only by BR or the Freightliner section of NFC and when doing so they must produce a statement showing how and at what charge the service will be provided. The LA is required to consider speed, reliability and cost and assess their importance in relation to customer needs and the nature of the goods.
An assessor may be called in to assist the LA in his deliberations. He will be drawn from a panel appointed by the Minister.
I will be looking at three further sections of the Bill on Aug. 16. These deal with: Expedited grants of special authorizations, terms and conditions and duration of special authorizations.
Grant in part only
• Only part of the B licence application made by Walker Brothers (Cowdenbeath) Ltd. was granted at Kirkcaldy last week.
The original application was for two articulated vehicles weighing 11 tons and five tons to carry goods for Kirkforthar Brick Co. Ltd.. as required. and goods within a radius of 120 miles of operating centre.
That part of the application pertaining to work for the named customer was granted butafter objections by British Railways, Sam Anderson (Newhouse) Ltd.. Road Services (Forth) Ltd., BRS and David West and Son Ltd., the rest of the application was refused because of lack of evidence.