Decision Reserved on Re-weighed Trailer Bid
Page 15
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ADISPUTE over the weight of an articulated low-loader trailer occurred during the resumed hearing of an application by Robert Walker (Haulage) Ltd.. Woodley. at Manchester last Friday. The applicant wanted to delete a trailer of 44 tons and add a trailer of 7 tons (the same trailer re-weighed). Mr. A. W. Balne, for the company. said that the vehicle in question had been acquired in 1962 from the vendors, and, after checking on a public weighbridge, it was found that it weighed 7 tons. and not 44 tons as had originally been thought. Mr. J. D. Whitchurch, of Thomas Neal and Sons. the vendors. told Mr. J. Backhouse, representing the private road objectors, that before the low-loader trailer was sold to Walker it had been completely overhauled_ the unladen weight had been altered by the addition of a hand winch, among other modifications, but it had not been re-weighed. Thomas Neal and Sons had given Walker the combined weight of the tractor and trailer at the time of the sale. Mr. Backhouse asked if it had not been obvious from the loads the trailer had been carrying that its unladen weight exceeded 44 tons.
At this juncture Mr. I. Gazdar, representing the North Western Licensing Authority, said that the Authority should
have been notified of the change in weight, and he asked that details should be produced of the work the vehicle had done before the modifications Mr. E. J. Walker, a director of Robert Walker (Haulage) Ltd. said that his company had sought a short-term licence for the trailer but it had been refused and the company had operated it then without proper authorization.
Mr. Backhouse suggested that on a previous occasion the Licensing Authority had been misled about the weight of the trailer. If the applicant was now seeking additional capacity, evidence of need must be produced. There had been illegal operation and it might be better, if this was to be dealt with, if all the Walker licences could be brought to court on some future occasion.
Mr. Gazdar reserved his decision.
Mr. A. W. Balne said that the views on the case expressed in Licensing Casebook in The Commercial Motor of June 21 were inconsistent with those taken by the parties involved in the case. He wished to take that opportunity of stating the motives that lay behind the adjournment of the case on June 12. They were not the views of Mr. Booth and himself which appeared in The Commercial Motor.