TRANSPORT TIPS FOR TRADESMEN.
Page 52
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Particularly Addressed to Those Who are Replacing Horsed Vehicles by Motors, or Contemplating So Doing.
AUSER of a number of light motor lorries has recently put to me a question in the reply to which many other users are probably interested, though they may not have realized that this is so.
Persons Carried on Goods Vehicles.
My friend has 'been threatened with police pro
ceedings on account of certain uses to which his vehieleS are put, and, broadly, because at times they carry human beingsother than the driver. These uses in his case are as follow:—
1. An assistant is sometimes sent out to help the driver to load and unload the vehicle.
2. One of the firm's representatives' is some times sent on the lorry to towns in which the firm does business, or may be brought back on the lorry from some such town when the lorry has delivered its load and is to return empty. 3. Employees of the firm engaged on the lirm'e . work in some such towns are, on occasion, brought back to the firm's premises in one of the lorries.
The question is whether such uses are legal in the case of a vehicle registered as a trade vehicle. Now, the legal definition of a trade vehicle insists that it shall be "constructed or adapted for use solely for the carriage of goods or merchandise in the course of trade or industry." This definition is not really good, because it is only common-sense that the vehicle must be constructed for the carriage of its
own driver, who may, to use a slang phrase, be "the goods," but certainly cannot 'be classified as mer chandise. It is equally a matter of common-sense that the driver must-be allowed to take with him an assistant, if the loading and, unloading of the vehicle cannot otherwise be efficiently and promptly performed. I have never heard of a trader being proseelated for sending out on his delivery van a man to look after the deliveries and thus save time. When it comes, to the carriage of human beings for any purpose not essential to the working of the vehicle, the case is different. There have certainly been instances of prosecntions when some firm has registered, as a trade vehicle, a machine fitted with a body designed for the carriage of samples and with a seat for the commercial traveller, either alongside the driver or in the interior. Of course, if such a vehicle is registered as a private motorcar there is nothing to be said, but if it is registered as a trade vehicle the point arises that the traveller is not "goods or merchandise." I believe that the law, in its wisdom, has laid it down that the only occasion on which a farmer may use a, farm cart for the carriage of passengers, is in the-event of his wishing to take his family and employees to church. Of course, in practice, he carries Hs men to and from their work in the fields and tecasinnally on holiday trips and nothing. is said, Fut I believe, if the local police were sufficiently •c fficmus, there would be technical grounds for aetion
From What has already been said, it is apparent that, technically, my friends are in the wrong in sending out or bringing back their men in lorries registered as trade vehicles, but, if the police take action in respect of such use, their action can only be regarded from the common-sense point of view as gratuitous interference in the conduct of trade.
Incidentally, all This brings us to a.point previously mentioned in. these notes. This 3 s, that, strictly speaking, a trader has no right to lend his van or Jerry, registered as a trade vehicle, to his employees c28
for their use for beanfeasts or holiday trips. Supposing that a trade vehicle, .insured as such, carries passengers for any purpose and meets with a serious accident involving personal injury, the position of the owner of the vehicle in the matter of recovering from his insurance company seems to be a, very weak one, and this is a point which he certainly ought to bear in mind. Presumably, if he is carrying his men to and from their work and they are injured, he can. recover by reason of his insurance against employer's liability, but if he ie merely authorizing their conveyance during their leisure hours for purposes of amusement, be may find himself in a very, awkward corner.
Now, it will, no doubt, have occurred to the reader that the whole position may very well be altered when the new scheme of licence duties comes into force. This is certainly the case. The new licence duty in respect of a fairly light van may be, say, 216 a year. Supposing that this vehicle were licensed not as a trade vehicle but as a vehicle for general use, the licence duty payable would be £1 per horsepower. If the official rating of the engine were not more than 16 h.p., it would, therefore, me* no more to license for geneeal use than to license as a trade vehicle.
Look Into the New Licence Scale.
It is, therefore, up to everytrader to look carefully at the scale of new licence duties so that, if the rated horse-power of any vehicle does not exceed the number of pounds per annum that would be payable on the basis of unladen weight for a trade vehicle, he may get greater latitude for use by licensing on the horse-power basis. This he has a perfect
right to do, if he pleases. In fact, he is legally bound to do it, if be is going to use the vehicle for any other purpose than the carriage of goods or merchandise, or if it is adapted for any other use. In quite a considerable number of eases, it will be found to be cheaper to take out licences on the horsepower basis. In the case of my friend mentioned above, the trade vehicles are all comparatively small machines of low horse-power. I do not think that any one of them would be charged more on the horsepower basis than on the unladen weight basis. Consequently, I have advised him to hope for the best and to endeavour to keep on the right side of the local police until January, after which he will license his cars for general use, and the police will have no further cause for action on account of any of the uses mentioned above.
I have gone into all this in some detail, because I believe that many users have not fully realized the prospective position and, consequently, are likely,. on the one hand, to pay more than they need for the use of some at least of their machines, and on the other to restrict the kinds of use to which they can legally be put. Take, for instance, the case of a light oar weighing about 14 .ewt. unladen and having an
engine of 12 h.p. under R.A.C. rating. If it be
classified as a trade vehicle, the annual payment from January upwards would be 216 a year. In the latter case, if the owner sees fit, he may at any time take off the van body and put on a touring car body and use the machine for private purposes. Inci dentally, all this shows what .a number of -flaves there are in the new scheme of taxation, by no means reflecting credit on those who have insisted on applying it in preference to the petrol tax--which, with all its faults, was more or less equitable.