ibunal Hear K. and B. Men
Page 73
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
on Special-A Deals
LLOW1NG investigations by the Northern Licensing Authority into special-A-licence deals, the business of K. and B. Motors, Ltd., castle upon Tyne, had suffered considerably, the Transport Tribunal I last week. Too many damaging assumptions had been made which 1 not be substantiated, declared Mr. J. R. C. Samuel-Gibbon, who ared for K. and B. He submitted that the Authority's suggestion that foals were "a fiddle" should not have been made.
Tribunal were continuing their of appeals by Mr. Charles Hewitt, Dumfriesshire, and Mr. John 1rlecdon. Cumberland, who had ir special-A licences revoked by rthern Licensing Authority (The rcial Motor. January 23).
g evidence for K. and B., Mr. insey, consultant engineer to the Haulage Association, said the specification of the weight of a and cab could vary over a wide y as much as 2 to 3 cwt. above or When a vehicle had been on the ix months, the absorption of .t and the accumulation of mud el matter could add up to 2 cwt. Inladen weight.
Edward Waters, a K. and B. , said they sold between 200 and ides a year. These were being every day, and it was impossible ht them without bodywork unless ;" were shown on the weighIf a vehicle with a 20-ft. wooden I were left standing in the rain it it could be 4-5-cwt. heavier next t.
ing to the president, Mr. Hubert said the company had never held —they had all been in his own • that of Mr. I. H. McLaughlin.
irector Sought Licences
Full pointed out that in July, 1955, ters applied for special-A licences /chides, hut he was not, in fact. o use them. On February 20, made a substitution and declared vehicle concerned was not suitthe work to be undertaken.
Naters replied that 80 per cent. lehicles purchased were unfit for so he did not consider a wrong vt had been made.
stioned by Mr. Hull, Mr. ;Min said he believed Mr. Hewitt sent when the documents relating assignment of his vehicle were . He (Mr. McLaughlin) did not as a haulier, nor was the vehicle :d from his private address, the ten. However, he did not think iers on the form were untrue. for the owner of the vehicle, which loan from K. and B.
full pointed out that the Tribunal I considerable importance to ions made on the forms. . It rave been made clear that vehicles ing acquired without the intention ; them.
iewitt told the Tribunal that his was delivered in early October, id Mr. McLaughlin gave him a special-A-licence number to use in case he was stopped for not displaying a disc. The application forms he signed were blank.
In evidence, Mr. K. C. Shearer, K. and B's Carlisle representative, explained that the application form for the assignment of this vehicle was not lodged until the following month because of difficulties in arranging hire-purchase.
Mr. Gibbon submitted that the Licensing Authority's campaign had been
going on for nearly a year without any inquiry to K, and B. Two letters from the company offering him help had been ignored.
The difference between the registered weight of Mr. Hewitt's vehicle and that on re-weigh eight months later was only 10 cwt. 53 lb., and in the case of Mr. Scott it was about 15 cwt. The evidence was quite insufficient for the Tribunal to say there Was any Wrong statement of • fact K. and B. were a company of good standing and Messrs. Waters, Shearer and McLaughlin had proved reliable witnesses, so their name should be cleared.
After warning all concerned about putting their names to blank documents, Mr. Hull said that before announcing their decision, the Tribunal would require the original weigh-tickets, the number of the special-A licence given to Mr. Hewitt, and the date and counterfoil of thc cheque paid by Mr. Hewitt to K. and B.