Glasgow Freightliner grant cot from 16 to 12 artics
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
TN written judgments this week the Transport Tribunal: (1) dismissed an appeal against the grant in March 1966 1. of six vehicles and six trailers to BR for c. and d. work at its Longsight (Manchester) Freightliner terminal; (2) cut to 12 a November 1966 grant of 16 articulated vehicles for BR's Freightliner terminal in Glasgow.
On the Longsight appeal—by J. Bradley (Accrington) Ltd. and other hauliers—the Tribunal said that to carry out its duties under the Transport Act 1962, BR was empowered to provide transport services by road for the carriage of goods which had been or were to be carried by rail.
But it was still necessary for BR to obtain licences under the Road Traffic Act 1960 before they could exercise those powers. The only respect in which BR's licence applications differed from the general run was that the LA and the Tribunal were required to consider the extent to which the vehicles to be authorized would further the provision of services under which goods would be carried partly by road and partly by rail or inland waterway without the need for unloading and reloading.
Mr. J. Backhouse, for the appellants, had taken the preliminary point that that application was bad because a new operating centre (Longsight) ought not to be allowed by a LA by way of a variation of licence. But the Tribunal ruled that on this point the application was perfectly valid.
There was no really cogent evidence of vehicles available for hiring, nor did the Tribunal think that the hiring of vehicles from the appellants would be a satisfactory way of meeting demand.
One of the grounds of the appeal was that the proposed BR rates were uneconomic. "But we observed that the single witness for the appellants said before the deputy Licensing Authority that if his vehicles were allowed with his traffic into the new terminals, it would pay him to use the service at the rates quoted by the respondent's witnesses. This seems to us to dispose of the argument." The deputy LA was right in deciding that a prima facie case had been made for extra facilities.
Concerning the Glasgow appeal—by Intercity Transport and Trading Co. Ltd. and other hauliers—the Tribunal said that it was clear in July 1966 that BR's Glasgow Freightliner fleet of 33 c. and d. artics would soon be inadequate and the application to add 16 units was lodged.
On the evidence of the increasing popularity of the Freightliner service and having regard to the absence of sufficient suitable vehicles, the LA was right in concluding that a case had been made for an addition.
"In our view, however, bearing in mind that the Freightliner service is a matter for co-operation between road and rail, it would be reasonable to leave a satisfactory proportion of the need thus established to be met from the resources, in terms of vehicles, that 'outside' hauliers are prepared to hire to the respondents and that the respondents are able to accept. . .
"We conclude that a grant of 12 vehicles out of the 16 applied for would be adequate, and to that extent the appeal is allowed."