HIKURANGI BUSES

Northern Advocate, 19 July 1933, Page 6

HIKURANGI BUSES

COMPANIES' DISPUTE

TRANSPORT APPEAL BOARD.

ONLY ONE SERVICE NECESSARY.

REVOKING OF NORMAN'S LICENSE SOUGHT.

The Hikurangi ,bus services this morning came under the review of the Transport Appeal Board, consisting of Mr Justice Frazer and Messrs L. Alderton and T. Jordan.

The Northern Motor Bus Co., Ltd., appealed against the recent decision of the No. 1 Licensing Authority, firstly against the Authority's refusal to grant the appellant company a license for the Whangarei-Hikurangi run, and secondly against the granting of a license to J. Norman and Sons for the same route. The appeal sought to have Norman's license revoked and granted to appellant company. Norman and Sons were granted the license on condition that they did not pick up or put down passengers whose journey either began or ended between the Post Office and the Ruatangata Crossing. Mr L. A. Johnson appeared for the appellant company and Mr S. C. Thorne represented respondents. The chief ground for the application was that the Northern Bus Company had been running a continuous service since June 1, 3921, and that resp6ndent company had been running only since May, 1927. His Honour pointed out that on general principles the board did not recognise the right of the man who had been first on the road. Only in eases where everything else was equal did the board recognise the moral right of the man with a prior service, but had first to consider the question of the service given to the public. In opening his case, Mr Johnson touched on the financial position of the appellant company, which, he said, was sound. He then went on to outline the extent of the cvjmpany's operations, and the up-to-dateness of the organisation. The way-bills showed 7.24 passengers per journey. The company had pioneered all the routes in the district, h'aving provided transport wherever it was necessary. Protection Sought.

"Despite its invested capital," Mr Johnson continued, "the company is finding things difficult, not only on account of the slump but also on account of the competition which has been creeping in and picking the eyes out of the business, by running a skeleton service. We contend the Act is intended to afford adequate protection to transport organisations such as ours, and at the same time to see that adequate service is given. It is our proud boast that we have never failed to deliver any passengers and have always maintained our timetable.

Counsel continued that the respondent company had only two buses, one of which was running on sufferance only. Mr Jordan: "What do you mean by that?"

Mr Johnson said the County Council had placed a 41 tons restriction on the route, but in order to protect invested capital had made the restriction apply only to vehicles bought after the decision was made. In the face of that, the respondent company had bought a bus with a loaded weight over the restriction limit and was at present running it on the road. As the County Council was endeavouring to obtain a 5h tons restriction, it had taken no action against Norman. The Northern Bus Company's traffic manager, Arthur Joseph Wilkinson, gave details of the company's organisation. The company had never missed a trip, and the miners had never missed a shift while appellants were running the Hikurangi service. Witness said his company had been offered the big bus recently bought by Norman and Sons, but had not accepted it, because it was not suitable for the work, and was over the 4J tons restriction.

Mr. Thorne: "How did you get the miners to Hikurangi after last Christmas?"—"They hired a car."

Witness said the miners had hired the car and were charged on a mileage basis, which worked out at the same cost to the men as the bus fares. Mr. Thorne: "And the car ran back in front, of Norman's bus?" —"Sometimes."

Mr. Thome: "Would you say Norman's buses were suitable for the run?"—"Yes."

"It was agreed at the hearing that only one service was necessary?"— '«Yes."

"And," said Mr. Thorne, "we agreed not to have anything to do with passengers between Whangarei and the Ruatangata Crossing if we were given the service."

Cross-examined further, witness said Norman's were not capable of providing an adequate service to Hikurangi. His Honour: "You were given the whole of the Kamo service, and Norman's had beyond that?"—"Yes." "Monopoly" A Misnomer.

Mr. Thorne: "19 there a Jiving in it between Whangarei and Hikurangi, not touching any passengers between Whangarei and Kamo?" —"Yes, for one."

"Which is the more payable, Norman's present run or yours between Whangarei and Kamo?"—"That is hard to say."

Mr. Thorne: "If you get the service you will have a monopoly of all services in. the district."

His Honour: "The word 'monopoly' is a misnomer in this instance. The Act is not framed to give anyone a monopoly, and even if all the services in one particular area are granted to one man he has only a quasi monopoly, subject to a very rigid public control, and licenses are granted from year to year." Mr. Johnson gave an explanation of the company's action in providing a car for the miners, stating that when the matter was ventilated before the Licensing Authority, the company had stopped the service immediately.

His Honour: "If there has been any illegality in regard to the hiring of the car it is only a trivial matter, and does not concern us very seriously in the question of the license. It was done evidently to oblige the miners as a bus could not be run."

The question of the we'ight limit on the road was explained by Harry Campbell Hemphill, who said that when the restriction was imposed it was laid down that any new vehicles coming into the district had to comply with the 4t} tons limit. Norman's were notified, but in December, 1932, they applied for permission to exceed the classification with their new bus. The council was not prepared to alter its decision. The council, however, had applied for a 5+ tons classification, and was taking no action against respondent company. Case For Norman's. "Nothing has been submitted to show that the decision was not right," said Mr. Thorne. Counsel said the Authority had considered fully all the details placed lief ore it before coming to its decision. Norman's were willing to run the fi a.m. bus for the miners, and to stand any loss as they considered it was in the public interest. The service was the sole means of livelihood for Norman and Sons. They had established It and made a success of it. When it was stated before the Authority that only one service to Hikurangi was necessary. Norman's offered to retire from the Kamo service and leave it solely in the hands of the Northern Bus Company in return for the Hikurangi service, which counsel considered was a very fair offer.In regard to the weight of the bus, Mr Thorne said it appeared from Mr Hemphill's evidence that the County Council was not satisfied itself that the restrict ion was in the public interest. It Lad applied to have the loads increased. Thomas Caldwell, a Hikurangi miner, said the 6 a.m. bus was necessary. The men were charged 8/ for 6 shifts, the same as the bus fare when they used the Northern Bus Company's car. Witness had missed work on one occasion through the car not turning up. Since Norman's had taken over the service had been satisfactory, and witness said Norman's were more dependable than the Bus Company.

Mr Johnson: "When the Bus Company was running its bus, did it ever let you down?" —"No, but the ear did.'' -

Another miner, James Smith, gave corroborative evidence. Norman's service had been quite satisfactory. Norman's bus was the most comfortable on the road.

Cross-examined by Mr Johnson, witness said one of the Northern Bus Company's vehicles leaked in wet weather.

Stephen Hughes, another miner, said he lost work one day as the, car did not turn up. The miners were well satisfied with Norman'.s.

Joseph Norman, one of the proprietors of J. Norman and Sons, said they had made an offer to the Licensing Authority that if they were granted the Hikurangi run they would leave the section from Kamo to Whangarci entirely to the Northern Bus Company. It was the only service they had, and they had received no' complaints about the service. They had never had an accident. The Decision. The Board decided to uphold the appeal, revoking the license issued to Norman and Sons and granting one to the Northern Bus Company for the whole road from Whangarei to Hikurangi.