Tomato Transport Costs : Overcharging Summons Dismissed
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I AST week, Wigan magistrates Ladecided to dismiss sue:mouses issued against a local firm of wholesale fruiterers w,ho, it was alleged, had overcharged on the cost of carriage of tomatoes brought from Liverpool to Wigan, Mr. J. C. Gibson, for the Ministry of Food, said the cases were broughtunder the Imported Tomatoes Maximum Prices Order, which allowed the price charged for tomatoes to be increased by the addition of a proper rate for carriage from the quay to the consumers' premises. The charge must not exceed 6s. 3d. per cwt In all these cases, a charge of Is. was made for each paskage of 22 lb.
The prosecution contended that a reasonable charge for the transport of packages of 28 lb. was or 10d. per cwt., as against the 5s. charged oy defendants. There were 316 packages in the consignment, for which £15 16s. was charged. Defendants afterwards' refunded 6d. per package, but even then the charge was too high.
Mr. Gerald J. Mullany, director of Port of. Liverpool Road Transport Control, Ltd., said that 2j-cl. should cover the cost of delivering a 28 lb. package of tomatoes from Liverpool to Wigan.
Mr. J. IIopwood 'Sayer, for defendants, contended that Is. per package was reasonable, having regard to conditions at the docks and the extra staff which had to be employed. in
making the refund of 6d. per package, there was no admission that Is. was unreasonable. That reduction was made to comply. with the wishes of the Ministry. It was riticulous to say that these packages could be brought from Liverpool to Wigan at 2id. each.
Mr, Lewis A. Pardey, a member of a firm of chartered accountapts, said that lie had examined the accounts and found that the cost of carriage. of
• tomatoes from Liverpool to Wigan worked out at 12.1d. per package.
In dismissing the summonses, the magistrates ammunced that they considered this to be a-difficult case, but thought, in the special circumstances, that a charge of Is. per package was not unreasonable.