Haulier Tries Again for Licence
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A CUMBERLAND haulier, who 18 .1-1months ago had his special-A licence revoked by Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, Northern Licensing Authority, applied for an A licence at Penrith last week.
The application, by Mr. William Stubbs, Norfolk Road, Penrith, was for a 71-ton platform vehicle to carry machinery, foodstuffs, agricultural produce and requisites in Scotland, the Midlands, north-east and north-west England, and London.
Mr. T. W. Campbell Wardlaw, for the applicant:said that Mr. Stubbs had done something wrong in altering the weight of a vehicle without notifying the Authority, but had now completely purged himself of the offence. Others whose licences had been revoked on similar grounds had now had them restored.
The applicant had suffered great hardship and had been out of work for some time. After his licence was revoked in July, 1958, he made an unsuccessful application for a licence in October the same year.
Later he acquired the shares of S. Rush, Ltd., Newcastle upon Tyne, and an application to put another vehicle on that licence was refused. In May, 1959, he appealed to the Transport Tribunal to vary the licence by addition of a vehicle of 5 tons 13 cwt. in place of one of 5 tons 2 cwt., and the appeal was allowed. Recently he had obtained an A licence in the Scottish Traffic Area.
Cross-examined by Mr. F. S. McHugh, for the British Transport Commission, who objected, Mr. Stubbs said a vehicle with a special-A licence was operated from a house in Dumfries. His other vehicle, the licence of which he was applying for, had been hired part of the time and for some of the time had been lying idle. He had had several inquiries from clearing houses for business.
Mr. McHugh submitted that there was no need for the vehicle and asked if Mr. Stubbs was a fit and proper person to hold a licence.
Following the Tribunal's decision. Mr. Hanlon said that a licence had been issued to S. Rush, Ltd., but they had not been able to find a registered office or the secretary of the company. Mr. S. Rush and his wife had nothing to do with the concern.
Mr. Hanlon reserved his decision.