AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

No C. and D. Service for One Vehicle

5th June 1959, Page 43
5th June 1959
Page 43
Page 43, 5th June 1959 — No C. and D. Service for One Vehicle
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?

Keywords : Business / Finance

AN application by A. R, Hardcastle, Ltd., Hessle, near Hull; for a collection and delivery vehicle to serve another on open A licence and a third on contract-A licence Was refused by the Yorkshire Licensing Authority, Maj. F. S. Eastwood, at Bridlington on Tuesday.

Mr. R. E. Paterson, for the applicants, said that because of dock delays affecting the A-licence -vehicles, it was sbught" te add a condition to the B licence of one vehicle to allow collection and delivery, within 10 miles, of goods . carried under the A licences. The long turnround period for the A vehicles was causing difficulties with customers,whilst the B vehicle had spare time which could be used to expedite dock collection and delivery, thereby overcoming problems associated with tw.o vehicles.

Questioned by Mr. P. Kenny, for the objectors, Sayers Haulage (Hull), Ltd., and Sam Allen (Hull), Ltd., as to why he had not sought to hire for collection and delivery, Mr. A. R. Hardcastle said that so far as he knew the objectors were tipper operators. He would not say there was a shortage of transport in Hull.

Mr. Kenny submitted that there were no grounds for a grant, The B licence was underemployed, which was the probable reason for the application, and there was no justification for collection and delivery for one A vehicle in the circumstances.

The objectors had not opposed recent applications by Key Warehousing and Transport, Ltd., and Robertson Dale Transport Co. for collection and delivery vehicles, said Mr. Paterson, and a small operator should not he singled out for different treatment.

The licence for the B vehicle expired on June 30, said Maj. Eastwood, yet the applicants had not been sufficiently interested to apply for renewal. No case had been made out for any grant, he maintained.


comments powered by Disqus