AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

LICENSING

30th July 1965, Page 32
30th July 1965
Page 32
Page 32, 30th July 1965 — LICENSING
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?

CASEBOOK

BY JOHN DARKER

Close Customer Liaison Can Yield Dividends

AT a recent public inquiry at Hanley I was interested in the evidence of Mr. T. W. Glover, a British Railways traffic representative. BR, who had objected to an application by J. L. Cooper Ltd., were concerned with the sharp rises in Cooper's revenue on traffic from Shelton Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and, with a valuable stake in the Shelton traffic, were relieved when Cooper expressed a willingness to amend the company's normal user. Mr. Glover told Mr. John Else, the West Midland Licensing Authority, that the Shelton traffic fluctuated a good deal. BR knew this because they charted Shelton's output to coincide with their own accountancy periods.

This revelation made Mr. Else recall only that they are maintaining their share the Dickensian character who "having of the market but, even more important.

much, wanted more ". (BR had, the growth prospect of that market for apparently, moved 75 per cent of the outthe future. These considerations are put from Shelton's new mill until basic to the planning of licensing strategy. recently.) "Your liaison must be very close ", Mr. Else rejoined. "They On the Way to Relief wouldn't give you information about their A haulier who can present tidy evidence output if you weren't very good friends." of his principal customers' production Mr. Glover added that Shelton's producpattern over a lengthy period, and who tion was computerized "and the railways takes the trouble to document the had offered to collaborate so that wagon occasions when he has been unable to requirements can be accurately forecast." cope with their needs, should be well I record this information here with on the way to achieving any justifiable the thought that road haulage interests licensing relief. One often hears in traffic should be alert to any similar opportunicourts customers' generalized criticisms ties of "tying in" the monthly or of a haulier's occasional shortcomings; periodic output figures of their principal seldom does the haulier give factual customers with their own records of details of his difficulties, perhaps even to vehicle availability, the extent of illegal operations on behalf of the customer.

The Growth Prospect LAs, after all, are not fools, and they Following up my comments in Licenmight find it a refreshing change to hear sing Casebook (The Commercial Motor, a haulier admit that, to meet a crying July 16)—" Anticipating Future Needs" need for vehicles, he had authorized —road hauliers must wish to know not excess hours. I hear that the West Midland LA intends to ask applicants and objectors it his area to send supporting documents, including figures of earnings, to him and to each other at least a week before a public inquiry. This follows the Transport Tribunal's judgment in the G. W. Pell (Kirton) case, to which I referred (Licensing Casebook, July 16).

If, as is probable, this action spreads, we may expect considerably fewer contested applications, if only because this would involve a major clerical exercise by the objectors.


comments powered by Disqus