Contrast in Evidence by Linked Companies
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I T was clear that Coventry Precision, Ltd., were in difficulties with their transport. The clarity of their evidence threw into sharp relief the inconclusiveness of that of their associated company, Dowty Equipment, Ltd., Cheltenham, Mr. W. P. James, West Midland Licensing Authority, said at .Birmingham last week. He had heard an application by Mr. H. A. Boileau, Coventry, to add goods as required for these two companies to the conditions of his B licence.
Mr. J. Foley Egginton, for the applicant, said he was already carrying aircraft components for them on his A-licence vehicle, and urgent deliveries were sometimes required when it was away on long-distance work.
After documentary evidence, produced by Mr. S. Gill, dispatch manager of Coventry Precision, Ltd., of delays when the applicant's A-licence vehicle was not available, Mr. G. H. P. Beames, tor British Railways, submitted that a case had been made out within a radius of 25 miles for that company. But oral evidence of longer-distance needs for Dowty Equipment was inconclusive. Cheltenham hauliers and Dowty's own C-licence fleet appeared capable of coping with this work.
A variation was granted to carry goods for Coventry Precision, Ltd., within a radius of 25 miles. The remainder of the application was refused.