AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Illegal Vehicle Weight

2nd January 1959, Page 32
2nd January 1959
Page 32
Page 32, 2nd January 1959 — Illegal Vehicle Weight
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?

Keywords : Law / Crime

TWO Northern hauliers, Mr. C. Hewitt, Annan, and Mr. J. Scott,

Arlecdon, whose special A licences were revoked for weight offences by the Northern Licensing Authority, Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, .in November (The Commercial Motor, November 14), were granted public •A licences at Carlisle on Tuesday for vehicles to be acquired of the original weight specified on their special A licences.

• Giving his decision, Mr. Hanlon said it was wrong that they should be allowed to continue with additional earning -capacity obtained illegally. If they were the innocent parties there were other means of obtaining redress from the dealers concerned.

Mr. T. Campbell Wardlaw, for the applicants, said the revocations had been suspended pending an appeal to be heard by the Transport Tribunal on January 14. Mr. Scott's application for a public A licence was submitted prior to the revocation and had received no objection, but Mr. Ilewitt's was made immediately following and was objected to by the British Transport Commission. It might be better if the hearing were adjourned 'pending the Tribunal's decision.

Mr. Hanlon replied that he was most anxious that the Tribunal should have the whole case before them. The vehicles could not be allowed to continue under special A licence and if the applicants had anything further to say on the question of need he would like to hear it.

Mr. Wardlaw said they wanted the evidence and figures presented at the revocation inquiry to be accepted as proof of need. The Goods Vehicles (Licences and Prohibitions) Regulations, 1952, prevented them from seeking the same vehicles to be put on the licences, so they were applying for unspecified vehicles of the same unladen weight.

Dealing with Mr. Scott, Mr. Hanlon

said that because he had been operating a vehicle of greater unladen weight than specified, his figures were clearly false to the extent that he had been able to carry additional traffic, so they could not support an application for an A licence.

Not Unfit He had been asked to treat the case as an application for an unspecified vehicle of 3 tons 16 cwt. In the special circumstances he would not deal with Mr. Scott as a person unfit to hold a licence and would grant a vehicle of no greater unladen weight than that specified on the special A licence, 2 Ions 17 cwt. This proposal would have to be published, giving Mr. Scott the chance to object.

Mr. Hanlon said that in the case of Mr. Hewitt he proposed to take similar action, subject to hearing what the objectors had to say.

Mr. J. McHugh, for the B.T.C., said Mr. Hewitt must prove need, especially as he had no customers of his own, but obtained all his traffic through Robson's

Border Transport, Ltd.

Mr. Hanlon pointed out that there was nothing to stop one haulier employing another. A licence would be granted for a vehicle of 2 tons 9 cwt. 98 lb., not 3 tons 1 cwt. as applied for.

Note; After the revocation of a special A. or any other licence, the holder cannot apply to put the vehicles concerned on to another licence before the expiry 'date of the revoked licence.


comments powered by Disqus