OPINIONS and QUERIES
Page 43
Page 44
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Compulsory Insurance— a Transport Manager's Criticisms. Income Tax Rebate for Wear and Tear. Wage Rates in the West An Unusual Cause of Fire. Ratio of Load According to Chassis Weight. Responsibility for Damage Caused in Narrow Road
NO PROPER CONTROL OF COMPULSORY INSURANCE.
[1623] Do you think that the Ministry of Transport is applying any intelligence to the question of compulsory insurance? I do not, and for the following reasons :— It is possible to present an insurance policy that has only a week to run and thus obtain a licence for a year. It is even possible to produce an insurance cover note valid for fourteen days and get a licence for a year. One need never renew'the insurance policy or take up the cover note, so the presentation of either to the Licensing Authority is mere stupid ceremony. The result is that upon the police is forced the duty of endeavouring to ascertain how many vehicles in this country are running about licensed but uninsured.. This they do in the most ineffective and inadequate manner possible. They hold up traffic on the roads, seldom catching a defaulter, but demanding insurance certificates from drivers in the employ of a concern like mine, and that continuously.
Meantime, if one gets knocked over and injured there is the chance that for one reason or another the car is uninsured. The owner risks and sometimes gets punishment, but that is of no benefit to anyone.
Licences should be issued solely for such a period as evidence of paid-up insurance can be produced. Cancellation Or suspension of insurance should be illegal, except on evidence of expiry or surrender of licence.
Control of vehicles, including protection of the public by compulsory insurance, should be dealt with in a rational manner and not by having :—(a) County councils licensing pleasure and goods vehicles and making an abortive pretence at checking them as insured; (b) traffic areas issuing licences to permit the use of already licensed goods vehicles for carrying goods, and not caring or inquiring if they be insured or otherwise; (c) insurance companies free and ready to suspend or cancel insurance on vehicles, irrespective of whether they be licensed and in use or not, and (d) police serving a thousand notices for production of insurance certificates and invariably missing the uninsured gentleman who smashes up one's best friend.
Of course it may seem all right to the intellectuals who govern us, but it seems all wrong to me that, after the public has been given the protection of compulsory insurance, a haphazard checking by policemen is all that is relied on to guarantee that any insurance at all is effected after the first few days of any licence issued to an irresponsible or undesirable person.
Louis DE SILVA, Transport Manager, London, N.1. Raphael Tuck and Sons, Ltd. CLAIMING AN INCOME-TAX ALLOWANCE FOR VEHICLE WEAR.
[4624] As a reader of The Commercial Motor, I have noticed that from time to time you have given particulars of running costs, etc., and am therefore prompted to seek your assistance.
Could you please tell me what rebate •I can claim from income tax for wear and tear of a Commer 2-ton van, the purchase price of which was 085? Also, I am frequently asked to quote for furniture removals for journeys of 100 to 175 miles from here, returning empty. I have been quoting at the rate of 8d. per mile-, but in a large number of cases find that somebody else has quoted a lower figure.
Is my figure excessive? I know of two instances where £9 was quoted recently for a 2-ton van load of furniture to Plymouth (175 miles each way) and Deal, about the same distance, in each case returning empty. According to my reckoning, neither of these journeys paid, and I should appreciate your views.
My annual mileage is 20,000 to 25,000. . A .I I . Portsmouth.
[The amount you can claim on account of wear and tear of your vehicle in making your return of income depends upon how old the vehicle is. You are allowed to commence to depreciate the vehicle at the rate of 22 per cent, per annum from the time it is acquired. That 22 per cent. is calculated each year on the depreciated value of the vehicle at the beginning of the year. For the first year, for example, you would ,calcuiiate it on the 4385 initial cost and the amount would be £84 10s. For the second year it would be 22 per cent. of £300 lOs. and so on. Eightpence per mile is correct as being the minimum rate at which you can make a reasonable profit with your type of vehicle for furniture removal over the distance named. Your net cost of operation is 6d. per mile. Your competitors are making only 6.18d. per mile, that is to say, are barely clearing the operating costs of the vehicle.—S.T.R.]
RATES OF WAGES IN DEVON AND CORNWALL.
[40251 Having been a regular reader of your weekly journal for some time, I wonder if you will kindly give me, or publish, the information that I require.
I am a driver of a 2-ton lorry, operating under a B licence. My employer has a small fleet oI 30-cwt. and 2-ton vehicles, all operating under the same class of licence. In the enclosed cutting from a local paper you will observe that we are classed as Grade 3.
We are paid from 45s. to 50s. weekly, without any deduction for health or unemployment insurance. Sometimes, but not often, we are given 2s. to 5s. over B29 our pay. There has been no standard rate of overtime. Last month one driver was given three days off because we all worked late in the harvest field over our normal day's work. In my case I am promised the time off, but received no payment for the extra work done.
As, however, we are likely to be very busy for the next two months, there seems little chance of getting this holiday ; in fact, it was suggested to one driver by. our employer that he could have a week's additional pay if he gave up his promised time. Is this legal?
In the cutting you will observe that it states that no operator shall be considered by the Board to be in default should he, in the period up to and including August 31, pay wages and observe conditions not less favourable to his employees than those provided for in the Board's agreement of November 20, 1934. The whole question is what were the hours and wages, etc., in the ,November, 1934, agreement, particularly for 30-cwt. and 2-ton lorries, and are we entitled to the new rates at once, or have we to wait until August 31, 193.5? If we are entitled to these rates at once, can we claim back pay and overtime?
The reason I ask is that I have seen cases where proceedings have been taken against employers for failing
to pay the full rates of pay. LORRY DRIVER. Devon..
[The position with regard to the Conciliation Agreement in Devon and Cornwall is rather complicated, for. the National Joint Conciliation Board rejected the agreement of November, 1934, of the Devon and Cornwall Board. Later, however, the National Board decided that the Devon and Cornwall Board should govern its own area in so far as internal traffic was concerned, whilst traffic from that area over the borders should be controlled by the Western Joint Conciliation Board. The agreement of November last was published in the issue of The Commercial Motor, 'dated December 14, 1934, but in view of the uncertainty of the position, we recommend you to communicate with Mr. J. Hieatt, the workers' secretary of the Devon and Cornwall Board, at 11, Arwenack Street,
Falmouth. From our reading of the agreement, we assume that you are entitled, from the date of the signing of the agreement until August 31, to the wages laid down in the agreement of 1934, and, after that date, to the wages under the new arrangement. The question of back payment is one which we should recommend you to place before Mr. Hieatt, as it is a matter requiring personal attention. You are certainly entitled to overtime as laid down in the agreement, With regard to your queries as to the legality of giving an additional week's pay for the sacrifice of time off, we are not clear whether the days' leave to which you refer are the annual holidays. The agreement does not appear to refer to the question of making extra payment for the sacrifice of a week's holiday, but we are of the opinion that an employer is not bound to give extra leave if overtime be worked; in the latter case payment for the overtime should, of course, be made.—ED.]
A FIRE CAUSED BY A PAINT-BRUSH, [4626] We thought that the following experience of an unusual cause of fire might be of interest to your readers :—One of our drivers was giving the engine of his Ford 2-tonner the usual clean, employing a washbowl of waste petrol and an old paint-brush. The bowl was standing beside the engine.
Having finished the carburetter side, he was working on the opposite side, where the dynamo and starter are situated. He was cleaning around the dynamo, when there was a sudden burst of flame, which spread all over the engine. The driver immediately used the fire extinguisher and was able to put out the flames
630 enveloping the 'engine, very little harm being done, whilst the bowl of petrol, which was still burning, was eventually extinguished by throwing an old coat over it.
Apparently what had happened was that the paintbrush, which had a metal band around it, came into contact with the cut-out terminal and cover; this, of course, caused a spark, which ignited' the petrol fumes.
We may say that our drivers have been in the habit-. of cleaning in this manner for some years past, but never before has there been any suspicion of danger, This will certainly be a lesson.
P. SARDLEY, Garage Manager.
Waltham Cross. (For W. B. Randall, Ltd.) WEIGHT ALLOWANCE ON VEHICLES.
14627J As a constant reader of your journal, I am. extremely interested in matters pertaining tor rates for. haulage and taxation, and I think it is time that things were placed on a more settled basis. •
In my -opinion, one of the most important 'things to commence with would be for some specified ratio of load to be permitted according to the chassis weight': For instance, for an unladen weight of 2 tons, the load to be carried could be 3 tons ; for 3 tons unladen, load 4f tons; 4 tons unladen, load 6 tons. In other words-, 50 per cent. above the unladen weight. This would give the makers a chance and prevent the constant., persecution of those users who employ the heavier classes of vehicle, which are weighed to see if they exceed the
gross load permitted by law. E. PENNINGTON. Ashton-in-Makerfield.
[The point raised by Mr. Pennington is a most important one and deserves serious consideration. Thel Society 'of Motor Manufacturers and Tiaders has this matter in )iancl, but, mainly, in respect of taxation. It is a little difficult to fix an arbitrary percentage of load, because this is apt to cramp design. It should, therefore, be done in conjunction with the makers. For example, there are given in this issue details of a new Commer model, which is designed expressly to carry up to 5 tons, with an unladen weight of just under 2i tons—En.]
DAMAGE TO A BLIND CAUSED BY A LORRY.
14628] Could you give me any advice as to who is liable to pay damages for a damaged window blind? I was driving along a narrow street and was passing another vehicle which was being unloaded, when my timber bolster, owing to the camber of the road, touched the front of the window blind and bent the iron stays slightly. I stopped almost at once and backed away from the blind. Incidentally, I did not leave the roadway at any time.
The shopkeeper has now sent me a claim for the damage on one of his own bullheads, the amount being for £2 2s., but he has not had anything done to the blind, which is still being used. I may add that the overall width of my lorry is 6 ft. 10 ins. D.G. Basingstoke.
[It is perfectly clear, from the facts stated in your letter, that you are liable to compensate the owner of the blind for the damage done, There is a doctrine in law known as " res ipsa loquitur," meaning, " the accident speaks for itself," and many cases of a similar nature have been decided, the person causing the damage being expected to pay—En.]