, Appeal for Heavier Vehicles Rejected
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN appeal by J. Stamper and Co. (Haulage), Ltd., Penrith, who claimed that they needed stronger vehicles to cope with their traffic, was dismissed by the Transport Tribunal in London on Tuesday. The Northern Deputy Licen. sing Authority had refused to grant the company four 5-ton vehicles an& an • articulated outfit on A licence in plate of four 3-tonners and an " artic " on
special A licence. • •
Stamper's appeal was adjourned last month (The Commercial Motor, November 14).
On Tuesday, Mr. J. R. C. :Samuel Gibbon, for the British Transport Commission, suggested that it was a fallacy to say that no additional carrying capacity would be gained by a.grant. ft was impossible to measure the carrying capacity of a vehicle by overloading it to such an extent that it required repairs in two years costing between £540 and £1,720. The repair bills showed that gross overloading had taken place.
Asked by the president, Mr. Hubert Hull, whether that should be a good reason to make the grant, Mr. Gibbon replied that such overloading should not be rewarded by the Tribunal in the form of extra carrying capacity.
Mr. T. H. Campbell Wardlaw, for Stamper's, submitted that the appeal centred upon the question of whether or not . the company would be substantially better off through a grant. All the evidence pointed against that.
Rejecting the appeal, Mr. Hull said the reasons for the decision would be given later in writing.