AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Camp Service Fight at Bristol H EARING of 19 applications from

3rd August 1956, Page 39
3rd August 1956
Page 39
Page 39, 3rd August 1956 — Camp Service Fight at Bristol H EARING of 19 applications from
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?

five operators in respect of changes in picking-up and terminal points, mainly on services between camps on Salisbury Plain and towns in the North of England, was begun • by the Western Licensing Authority in Bristol, last week.

After an all-day, hearing, only five of the applications had been heard, and the chairman, Mr. S. W. Nelson, adjourned the sitting to a date to be announced.

Seven of the applications were made by Shergold and White, Ltd., Salisbury; four by Mr. S. C. Shergold, Tidworth; four by Avon Coaches, Ltd.; two by Wilts and Dorset Motor Services, Ltd.; and two by Hants and Dorset Motor Services, Ltd. Shergold and White and S. C. Shergold opposed each other in seven of the cases.

in the first three cases, Shcrgold and White applied for permission to run a service from Tilshead to Liverpool and two from Tilshead to Birmingham. They were successfully opposed by Mr. D. F. Stanfield and Wilts and Dorset.

An Army witness said that his colleagues were not satisfied with the present services to Liverpool and •Birmingham.

The witness added that he had known of soldiers being left behind when they wanted to return.

Mr. L. Morris, of Shergold and White, spoke of the chaos which existed at Birmingham bus station on Sunday nights when soldiers were returning to camp.

Refusing the applications, Mr. Nelson said: "We feel the three operators concerned have failed to carry out that co-operation we might expect from people who should be working in combination."

They were appalled to hear someone say he did not know which week-end he was operating. It was disgraceful that an operator should not be able to advise potential passengers when they were not coming back on the following Sunday night.

An application by Mr. S. C. Shergold to add Oldham, Huddersfield, Halifax and Bradford to the service he was already. running between Tidw-cirth and Leeds, was opposed by Shergold and White on the ground that they already operated a service on the route arid an additional service would mean abstraction of traffic. Permission was granted, Mr. Shergold successfully opposed an•application by Shergoldand White, to

operate a service from Porton to Leeds.

Shergold and White agreed that they had made four previous applications for the service, all of which had been refused. Mr. R. Crowther, for Mr. S. C. Shergold, submitted there Was n o evidence to support it.

BAMFORD'S BIG LIABILITIES

I T was stated at Derby Bankruptcy • Court on Tuesday that Eric Earles Bamford, former managing director of a group of haulage and engineering companies, had gross liabilities of 1255,685 with assets of £3,404. Bamford appeared for public examination with an escort from Leicester prison where he is serving a seven years' sentence, imposed at Derbyshire Assizes in June, after being found guilty of obtaining from finance companies sums totalling f:145,000 by means of advances on commercial vehicles which did not exist.

The hearing was adjourned generally. with leave to restore.


comments powered by Disqus