Representations on Joint Bus Services
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
D EPRESENTATIONS were made by 11■ four bus companies to the Northern Traffic Commissioners, at Carlisle last Friday, concerning a clause in their licences which states that they are "jointly and severally" responsible for the maintenance of joint services. The Western S.M.T. Co., Ltd., Scottish Omnibuses. Ltd., Ribble Motor Services, Ltd., and United Automobile Services, Ltd., who operate joint services within the Northern Area, had applied for the renewal of licences.
Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, chairman, said that in view of a recent case which the Commissioners heard (Cadman and O'Hara, The Commercial Motor, February 19) there was some doubt whether the clause could be effectively enforced, and whether the Commissioners ought not to have some schedule of the joint services.
In the Cadman and O'Hara case, the parties held a licence to operate a miners' service under the same terms as the four large companies. One of the parties had fallen out with the National Coal Board and he was unable to continue to run, but the other operator did so under his "jointly and severally licence," Reconsideration Urged Mr. R. M. Palmer, representing the two Scottish companies, stated that he had been instructed strongly to urge that the Commissioners should reconsider the matter. The companies were particularly concerned regarding that part of the proposal which required that an indication be given of which journeys were to be worked by each of the joint operators, because it would be impracticable at all times to observe such a condition.
Mr. Palmer submitted that the present arrangements had stood the test of time and it would become increasingly difficult to comply with a specific timetable during the course of a licence. Generally speaking, an endeavour was made to ensure an equal amount of mileage run by each joint operator, but because of unequal A28 distances between terminal points it became necessary to adjust the number of journeys operated by each, at intervals, to ensure a balance of mileage. Intermediate duplication was another difficulty as, of course, was the replacement of a vehicle which had broken down.
Mr. Hanlon asked whether copies of correspondence concerning joint operation could be forwarded to the Commissioners. "We do net have the faintest idea who is running and we are entitled to know. If we are granting licences to run, we ought to have a copy of whatever agreements you come to," he added.
For the United company, Mr. J. L. R. Croft said that it would be impossible to submit timetables to the Commissioners specifying the responsibility on certain of the joint services, which changed almost daily. He did not, however, think it would be unreasonable for the Coinmissioners to be given a general outline of the way in which each of the services was operated.
Mr. R. D. Sutton, for Ribble, said that their licences in other areas did not contain the words "and severally." They were willing to send a letter to the Commissioners giving the general modas operandi of their services. He reminded the Commissioners, however, that they already held copies of agreements that Ribble had with other operators.
It was decided that a general statement would be sent to the Commissioners upon the renewal of licences authorizing joint services. Mr. Hanlon said that no further action would be taken.
OBITUARY
WE regret to record the death of MR. V" ALFRED HAROLD DACK.
Mr. Dack was chief engineer of the South London depots of the Union Cartage Co., Ltd., a position he assumed when he joined the company in 1938. He was a founder-member of the Institute of Road Transport Engineers, and had been honorary treasurer since its inception in 1945. He was 57.