Sub-contracting from B.R.S.?
Page 61
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
JTHINK that the leading article, "Clear the Air," in I your issue of March 26, is a most timely one. I trust it will have the effect of at least minimizing the wholesale cutting of rates which has already started.
Those who purchase assets from British Road Services, and particularly if they are hauliers who have suffered from the effects of nationalization, feel that they are entitled to obtain traffic at the same time. It is recognized that there is nothing in the Transport Act Afhich says that they are entitled to traffic with the vehicles they purchase, but it is . felt that there is a moral right in this respect. Be that as it may, there is to reason to slash rates to ribbons, particularly in these mrly days.
As the sale of units proceeds, B.R.S. will find them;elves increasingly in the position of having more traffic han they can move. There may even be firms who like I.R.S. and who have huge blocks of traffic to otter vhich no smaller haulier could handle. Surely, now s the time to get together round the table with R.R.S. o discuss terms for sub-contracting.
hope your article helps to save a large number of Fitiliers committing business suicide in trying to carry by quoting unnecessarily cut rates.
South Ben fl eet.. R. B. BRITTAIN
Substitution of Semitrailers ?
TUITH reference to the reply of your legal adviser to my letter on semi-trailers in transport units, pubshed in your issue dated March 26, I would like to Ice the matter a little further.
If, as is suggested, the word "vehicle" undoubtedly eludes a trailer, and that this word may have been ied deliberately in para. 6 instead of the term "motor :hide," is it therefore permissible to throw in two gid motor vehicles and take out an articulated vehicle, two vehicles for two vehicles?
It has been categorically stated that this is not perissible in terms of the First Schedule to the 1953 Act, though it will be recalled that at one time one or ro Licensing Authorities were of opinion that this Duld be in order.
My opinion, with all due deference hnd, of course, bject to expert legal opinion, is that para. 6 of the rst Schedule uses the term "specified vehicle" as a ference to motor vehicles, because in the last sentence specifically refers to trailers as being something quite dinct. In other Words, a specified vehicle, i.e.. a )tor vehicle, can be exchanged only for one of similar less unladen weight, but neither in para. 2 of the rst Schedule nor in para. 6 is there the slightest refer= to the unladen weight of trailers. So long, there-e, as there is no attempt to increase the number of iilers, there does not seem to be any prohibition on Teasing their unladen weight.
Srly own view, for what it is worth, of the inclusion a reference to unladen weight in G.V.1A (SP) and V.6 (SP) is either that the draftsman was following layout of forms G.V.1A and G.V.6 too slavishly or !, that the Ministry of Transport, having noted the lission of any reference to the unladen weight of trailers in the Act, are trying to pull a fast one over the industry by suggesting that the same provisions govern licensing under the 1953 Act as is the case with the 1933 Act.
G. W. IRWIN, Secretary,
Eastern Area, Road Haulage Association. Cambridge.
Are Expensive Large Units Unwanted ?
REGARDING your leading article "Buildings Not Wanted" (issue March 26), I believe that you are wrong about the buildings. I think that it is the larger units that are not wanted, at the prices expected. It is all very well tor a small man to pay a very high price, but when 10 vehicles or over are offered, the only persons who can buy these are hard-headed business men, who seem to have more sense than to pay the very high prices expected for licences that may last only two years.
Preston. I NTEREsTED.
Suggestions for Road Safety
A S a regular reader of your most interesting paper, 1-1 would like to submit some ideas dealing with the safety of people during their daily travel.
A pedestrian can change direction far more rapidly than anyone else using our roads today, and to help in controlling him large sections of our pavements should be supplied with guard rails of a type which could not easily be climbed.
Cyclists form a very large section of road users, unfortunately they also hold a high place in the accident table. It is only fair, both to them and other road users, that every cyclist should be compelled to hold a licence and certificate of insurance. After all, they use the roads and they should help both in their upkeep and the safety on them.
Motorcyclists also have a bad record of accidents. In my view, one of their chief faults is excessive speed. These machines have a high power-weight ratio and their owners, often inexperienced, are apt to put into practice on the highway what they have seen at the cinema or at racing circuits. Personally, I think that their engines should be governed to a reasonable limit of speed and the age for riding them, should be raised.
I would suggest a special speed limit of 35 m.p.h. on open roads for goods vehicles weighing 8 tons or over.
In coaches and buses, there is great need for standardization of entrances and exits. My own view is that the ideal place for the door is at the near-side front.
Often, even on double-deckers, this would increase safety, as everyone entering or leaving would have to pass near the driver, furthermore, the door should be controlled by the latter. This would prevent people from boarding or alighting while the bus is moving or stationary in traffic. This would help in reducing accidents, which could now be caused by the travelling public being allowed to ring the bell as they please.
Pickering. North Yorks. CARRIER.