HAULIERS' MATRIMONY
Page 43
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AST week, at Bristol, Mr. S. W. 1-4 Nelson, the Western Licensing Authority, granted an A licence specifying four tippers to carry solid prepacked coal for a named customer over a 150-mile radius to Golden Valley Transport Ltd, of Stoke Gifford.
The customer—Krycoal Ltd.—supported the applicat:on and, after other matters had been dealt with and objectors had withdrawn from the case, Mr. Nelson granted the application subject to an exchange of letters between the customer and the haulier. These, he said, should state that the haulier, on the one hand, would supply the venicles to the customer and that the customer, on the other hand, would employ the vehicles " practically full time ".
After Mr, T. D. Corpe, for the applicants, had said that letters would be exchanged as requested and copies would be sent to the Licensing Authority, Mr. Nelson remarked in his congenial way: "They will be bound together in hauliers' matrimony ", to which Mr. Corpe added: " If there is such a thing! "
am not sure how this would be treated if, for some reason, either of the parties decided to appeal against the grant; but I am sure that a lot of people would agree that this two-way written undertaking is really going too far in shackling the A-licensed haulier.
Mr. Nelson, in asking for, a two-way agreement, is understandably trying to protect other hauliers because, if the customer does not use the haulier, then it is more than likely that the haulier will be tempted to use the tippers for other work. Accepting the fact that the old A-licence concept ot "anything, anywhere" has been ousted, and that the A-licensed haulier is restricted to using the vehicle according to the normal user on a 90 per cent basis, is not Mr. Nelson mixing up his licence categories a bit?