AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Opinions and Queries

5th March 1954, Page 58
5th March 1954
Page 58
Page 58, 5th March 1954 — Opinions and Queries
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?

More Anomalies in Trailer Law

VOU published in your issue dated February 12, a I letter from A. Marenbon, in which he quotes three more cases of legal anomalies.

I agree with him wholeheartedly that these are amongst many points which should be rectified as soon as possible.

He expresses surprise that I did not mention them myself; in point of fact there are so many similar instances that it was impossible in the course of one article to deal with them all, and I referred to such anomalies in general terms at the end of it. In particular the curious situation regarding axle loadings could not fairly be dealt with except with the use of considerable space and many drawings.

For example, a normal articulated vehicle including a single steering axle and single driving axle on the prime mover, with a single trailing axle on a semi-trailer, is permitted to carry 19 tons gross, provided that the load on each axle is less than 8 tons. However, this gross load may be increased to 22 tons if the load on the trailing axle is reduced to 6i tons.

A little reflection will show how absurd this law is, and it is certain that it was not intended to operate in this way, but, nevertheless, that is the law as it stands, and it merely serves to emphasize the point made by Mr. Marenbon, that it is time the legal code was revised.

Incidentally, in your February 19 issue, the article by your legal adviser, "Can Artic Replace Rigid Vehicle," lends still further weight to my contention.

Letchworth. F. W. KNIGHT, Sales Manager, Hands (Letchworth), Ltd.

Change-over After A Smash .

AS a point of interest, I am sending with this letter two photographs [One of these is reproduced.—ED.] of one of our Albion FT 101 vehicles, taken after an accident when it was less than two months old.

The incident occurred at a railway level (?) crossing and, as usual here, it was being driven by a native African driver who tried to beat a train at a crossing where there are no gates or even poles. By the appearance of the vehicle after the trouble, you will see that the train won! The load consisted of metal window frames and these were strewn all over the lines. The driver of the vehicle was killed but as his dependants obtained over £400 under the Workmen's Coinpensation Act, they did not do so badly, as this is a large sum to African natives.

Our maintenance staff got to work and completely rebuilt the vehicle in a few weeks. The chassis was shortened and the final-drive ratio lowered. It has now been transformed into an articulated vehicle and, together with the rest of the fleet, is doing its nightly run of 300 miles to Bulawayo, six nights a week.

You will see by this that we here in Southern Rhodesia have our problems much the same as do operators at home. When an accident does occur, however, it is usually more serious, as the African, in an emergency, is slower to react than is the European.

Salisbury. HORACE J. CANE, A.M.I.R.T.E. Southern Rhodesia. Swift Transport Services, Ltd.

Tax Allowances on Transport Units

IT seems to us that the particulars and conditions of 1 sale regarding tenders to the British Transport Commission include rights under Section (3) 4 of the Transport Act, 1953, as well as the value of the property for which the tender is made. We asume in these circumstances that capital allowances, etc., under the Income Tax Acts will be given only on the value of property (vehicles, etc.), excluding the value of the " rights" mentioned above. • " Hanley, Staffs. DONALD IL BATES AND Co.

[Our legal adviser replies: The "rights referred to are, of course, those specified in the first Schedule to the Act, which, speaking generally, entitle the buyer of a transport unit to a special A licence as of right. This particular right is probably worth far more to a buyer than the actual value of the " visible assets" purchased. For income-tax purposes, I consider that only the latter would count for capital-expenditure allowances, and that as regards the other right, the position is in a sense analogous to the goodwill of a business. On the question of succession to another's business, Section 328 of the Income Tax Act, 1952," is relevant. Presumably, it is not too difficult to assess the open-market value of the vehicles, etc., divorced from the rights which go with them. If:this can be ascertained, I do not see any difficulty in assessing the value of the rights referred to by a process of subtraction from what a willing buyer would pay in the aggregate.—ED.)


comments powered by Disqus