1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140 
Wessex Revocation Appeal Fails
Page 46
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DISCREPANCIES in an application form to transfer a B licence were not appreciated by .Wessex Construction and Plant Hire Co. Ltd., of Bedhampton, Hants, until the South Eastern Licensing Authority revoked the licence at a public inquiry, last year.
This was stated by Mr, R. M. Yorke, representing Wessex Ltd. when the company appealed against the Authority's decision before the Transport Tribunal in London last week. The appeal was dismissed.
Mr. Yorke told the Tribunal that the vehicle involved was a tipper acquired by Wessex Ltd. when the company took over H.M. and P. Contractors Ltd., of Havant. When the vehicle became inoperative it was replaced by a modern diesel tipper and application was made by Wessex for the appropriate transfer of the carriers' licence.
The application form showed Droxforcl as the operating base whereas Wessex was using the vehicle from Havant. The form was prepared by a firm of transport consultatives who omitted to point out this discrepancy when the form was signed by Mr. Austin Spraggs, managing director of Wessex Ltd.
The company was unaware that H.M. and P. had acquired the old vehicle and licence from a previous owner operating from Bushey Down Farm, Droxford, in 1959 and it was H.M, and P. who changed the operating base to Havant and also abandoned all but one of the previous customers, said Mr. Yorke.•
The Licensing Authority ruled at 'he inquiry that there had been a change of operating base and no facilities pro. videcl for existing customers.
Announcing the decision, Mr. G. D.
Squibb, president, said that there had been appeals allowed by the Tribunal where the appellant had made a statement regarding the operating centre, which was true at the time of signing the application form but subsequently found to be untrue. In this case the statement made was wholly untrue at the time the form was signed.
"it seems to us that the proper course to take in this case is to sustain the decision of the Authority in order that the appellants, if they are so minded, can make fresh application", said Mr. Squibb.
A 21-day stay of execution was granted to Wessex Ltd. to enable the company to "put its house in order ".
Mr. D. PALMER nUR issue of January .17 contained a
report of the third day's hearing on a 12-vehicle A licence application to the Eastern Licensing Authority by G. W. Peacock of Biggleswade.
Our report stated that Mr. Ormond, the Licensing Authority, when adjourning his decision, pointed out that adjournments of the hearings had not been at his request; and that Mr. D. Palmer, for the independent objectors, had replied: "We are jointly and severally to blame ".
Our report was condensed owing to pressure on space. If it conveys that Mr. Palmer was either personally or on behalf of his clients accepting responsibility for the delay in hearing this case, this is not so. Mr. Palmer was accepting on behalf of his clients that it was. not the Authority which was responsible for the adjournment, which had in fact been arranged to suit the convenience of all the parties to the application.