RACV tows wrong car from Chadstone car park

[Cobra]

It's a disgrace that these things can happen. If I was this chick I would be F#@ed off too. They offered her an insurance upgrade worth 100 bucks? I would have thrown that back in their face. I'm not saying she needs to be financially compensated, but they could at least fix her door seal. If it's a dog-leg seal which runs the entire length of the car, it would cost quite a bit more than the value of their 'upgrade'.

What I would want more than any compensation is an assurance that this mistake will not happen again. RACV should review their procedures to ensure this mistake won't happen again. And old mate should hang up the keys too, because he has clearly demonstrated that his observational skills are sub par to what would be expected of someone who can safely operate a motor vehicle.

[AWD Chaser]

Just a hypothetical question then :

If I happened to own a tow truck, and the old man called me, and we towed the car away, broke into it, and found out that it was someone elses car,

would I be charged with theft and damage to a motor vehicle?

Would be interesting to know what model/colour his car was and the model/colour the stolen car was

[flappist]

Originally Posted by AWD Chaser

Just a hypothetical question then :

If I happened to own a tow truck, and the old man called me, and we towed the car away, broke into it, and found out that it was someone elses car,

would I be charged with theft and damage to a motor vehicle?

Would be interesting to know what model/colour his car was and the model/colour the stolen car was

If there was no intent to steal it would be difficult to convict.

[FNQracing]

Storm in a teacup. Really. Get a grip. RACV tows the wrong car coz some old dodger has a brain fart.

Someone call the cops.

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

Gee there are some knobs in this thread, you Aussies are getting more like the Yanks everyday with your "sue them" & "I want compensation" mentality.

Poor old codger makes a mistake, then large organisation makes a mistake and all hell breaks loose, get over it.

Sad & pathetic about sums it up.

I agree entirely.

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

Gee there are some knobs in this thread, you Aussies are getting more like the Yanks everyday with your "sue them" & "I want compensation" mentality.

Poor old codger makes a mistake, then large organisation makes a mistake and all hell breaks loose, get over it.

Sad & pathetic about sums it up.

Completely agree mate, we've all stuffed up in our lives, everyone of us. Also the article states the window seal still needs to be replaced but it doesn't say they will not replace it.

The litigous nature of todays society is nothing short of a joke as has been discussed in another thread. The RACV should fix the window seal and everyone should get on with their lives.

[Iggypoppin']

Jim gooses comment sums it up %100.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

Gee there are some knobs in this thread, you Aussies are getting more like the Yanks everyday with your "sue them" & "I want compensation" mentality.

Poor old codger makes a mistake, then large organisation makes a mistake and all hell breaks loose, get over it.

Sad & pathetic about sums it up.

It seems I don't share the popular opinion here, I can't agree with you.

Fair enough the 80 year old losing his marbles, but an organisation as big as the RACV must have some kind of protocol that needs to be followed before towing a vehicle, which was obviously ignored. That's negligence, not a simple mistake. What kind of morons allow a car to be towed without even checking who it belongs to? Surely the order to tow would have contained the car's rego, which obviously wouldn't have matched the member's car. This is after the RACV scout has already come out and assessed the situation; and by "assessed" I can only assume they showed up, couldn't be bothered to follow RACV's protocol then sent through the order to have it towed. I simply can't fathom how an organisation as large as the RACV could have employees so negligent. Unless of course it is the RACV's policy to tow any car that a member claims is theirs.

It's easy to call people knob heads because this kind of stupidity upsets them, but put yourself in the victim's shoes (yes, victim - her car was towed away and broken into while she was running around for God knows how long going through the stress of having your car stolen), if it happened to you I'm sure you'd be fuming. Anyone who says they wouldn't be upset about having their pride and joy towed then broken into cannot be serious. Think about it, whilst you are running around a carpark like an idiot, stressing about your car being stolen, a bunch of blokes have towed it away and are in the process of breaking into it, then going through your personal possessions inside the car before realising that it would have been alot easier to actually check the rego before towing it away.

Another thing, how stupid would the assessor ("poor old codger") have had to be?? First, let's identify the car as belonging to the member through the rego.. actually nah, really can't be bothered. Ok, the central locking doesn't work... how about we try the key manually? Oh, it doesn't fit. Interesting. Tow it fellas.

It's easy to sit at the computer and think about how much of a mountain people are making of this molehill, unless it was you in that car park and your car being taken away and broken into, as the result of an RACV employee's negligence. Flame suit at the ready.

[Iggypoppin']

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

It seems I don't share the popular opinion here, I can't agree with you.

Fair enough the 80 year old losing his marbles, but an organisation as big as the RACV must have some kind of protocol that needs to be followed before towing a vehicle, which was obviously ignored. That's negligence, not a simple mistake. What kind of morons allow a car to be towed without even checking who it belongs to? Surely the order to tow would have contained the car's rego, which obviously wouldn't have matched the member's car. This is after the RACV scout has already come out and assessed the situation; and by "assessed" I can only assume they showed up, couldn't be bothered to follow RACV's protocol then sent through the order to have it towed. I simply can't fathom how an organisation as large as the RACV could have employees so negligent. Unless of course it is the RACV's policy to tow any car that a member claims is theirs.

It's easy to call people knob heads because this kind of stupidity upsets them, but put yourself in the victim's shoes (yes, victim - her car was towed away and broken into while she was running around for God knows how long going through the stress of having your car stolen), if it happened to you I'm sure you'd be fuming. Anyone who says they wouldn't be upset about having their pride and joy towed then broken into cannot be serious. Think about it, whilst you are running around a carpark like an idiot, stressing about your car being stolen, a bunch of blokes have towed it away and are in the process of breaking into it, then going through your personal possessions inside the car before realising that it would have been alot easier to actually check the rego before towing it away.

Another thing, how stupid would the assessor ("poor old codger") have had to be?? First, let's identify the car as belonging to the member through the rego.. actually nah, really can't be bothered. Ok, the central locking doesn't work... how about we try the key manually? Oh, it doesn't fit. Interesting. Tow it fellas.

It's easy to sit at the computer and think about how much of a mountain people are making of this molehill, unless it was you in that car park and your car being taken away and broken into, as the result of an RACV employee's negligence. Flame suit at the ready.

I retract my previous statement. You don't need a flame suit. You are totally correct.

[Dave3911]

Nobody is arguing that RACV didn't totally and utterly drop the ball - especially with something as simple as confirming the rego matches the membership (Remembering of course this might not be the case, as some policy's allow for "total" care and doesn't actually have to be your car)........ Or the fact that the patrolman who attended is obviously a complete numpty.

But, now that the mistake has occured - what is it exactly that some of you guys want? Nobody died. Nobody was injured. At best, it was a bit of a shock and inconvience..... RACV have publicly apologied and offered a free upgrade on the customers service. What more do you want? 40 virgins? A public burning at the stake of the patrolman? The towie to be hung, drawn & quartered?

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by Dave3911

. What more do you want? 40 virgins? A public burning at the stake of the patrolman? The towie to be hung, drawn & quartered?

52 virgins....

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

It seems I don't share the popular opinion here, I can't agree with you.

Fair enough the 80 year old losing his marbles, but an organisation as big as the RACV must have some kind of protocol that needs to be followed before towing a vehicle, which was obviously ignored. That's negligence, not a simple mistake. What kind of morons allow a car to be towed without even checking who it belongs to? Surely the order to tow would have contained the car's rego, which obviously wouldn't have matched the member's car. This is after the RACV scout has already come out and assessed the situation; and by "assessed" I can only assume they showed up, couldn't be bothered to follow RACV's protocol then sent through the order to have it towed. I simply can't fathom how an organisation as large as the RACV could have employees so negligent. Unless of course it is the RACV's policy to tow any car that a member claims is theirs.

It's easy to call people knob heads because this kind of stupidity upsets them, but put yourself in the victim's shoes (yes, victim - her car was towed away and broken into while she was running around for God knows how long going through the stress of having your car stolen), if it happened to you I'm sure you'd be fuming. Anyone who says they wouldn't be upset about having their pride and joy towed then broken into cannot be serious. Think about it, whilst you are running around a carpark like an idiot, stressing about your car being stolen, a bunch of blokes have towed it away and are in the process of breaking into it, then going through your personal possessions inside the car before realising that it would have been alot easier to actually check the rego before towing it away.

Another thing, how stupid would the assessor ("poor old codger") have had to be?? First, let's identify the car as belonging to the member through the rego.. actually nah, really can't be bothered. Ok, the central locking doesn't work... how about we try the key manually? Oh, it doesn't fit. Interesting. Tow it fellas.

It's easy to sit at the computer and think about how much of a mountain people are making of this molehill, unless it was you in that car park and your car being taken away and broken into, as the result of an RACV employee's negligence. Flame suit at the ready.

Totally agree mate. It's just lucky it was a 21 yo chick and not a mother with a whole bunch of small kids and a shopping trolley full of stuff.

[Jason[98.EL]]

The racv tow trucks are run by the company my step father works for here in geelong and the guys that drive them have so many regulations they need to follow i cant work out how this has happened

every driver they have has a digi camera with them to take pics of every vehicle before it is towed even down to the rego plate

from what I read the car has got damage as well hope the racv pay for it to be fixed

[302 XC]

Just on this issue
When the mates car broke down and used his mothers membership
She is covered in any car (im sure i wrote that some where)
The bloke who inspected the vehicle and couldnt get it running,was the bloke who initiated the tow truck
No extra assessors were involved
The membership numbers were written down and all car details (i was there)
Then the member whos number was used had to sign for any work and the tow
This is all done to cover them
A simple mistake happened
We arent all perfect,we make mistakes
Yes their would be stress of sorts for sure
But a quick ring to the cops regarding this,and a bit of investigating found the car
If all damages are rectified maybe a few extras for good will wouldnt that do
Seriously sack the towie and sue ???
I take it alot of you guys have done the "sue" issue and no what its all aboout
and how much money you can loose my playing the
"Im bigger than you card"
Trust me on that one ,sueing people is not as easy as it sounds

[LTDHO]

Firstly no assessors are involved, this is not an insurance claim.
Secondly, the old bloke would have asked to get the car towed under his membership, this would allow for any car with any rego.
Thirdly, the towie just needs to ask the member which car needs to be towed.
Fourthly, the towie did as per the members request.

So before commenting, know the rules first.

[Madaya]

This is such a laugh, I just have to reply.
To quote a previous... "The towie, his wife and children should all be dragged out onto the road at 3am and shot." said in humour of course, I'd like to add "yeah, and shot slowwwwwly."

If I went back to my parked car, and found it was not there, and then found out that it had been accidently towed, but kept in the care of a reputable organisation. Apologies made, even compensation (however small) offered and no damage done, then

The alternative being it could have been 'really' stolen. Thrashed within an inch of its life, or worse still, killed an innocent in a high speed accident and then torched on a back-block, with any valuables lifted.

I'm sure the crim would apologise and offer me compensation for all the trouble he/she caused, i.e. 'sorry mate, I didn't mean to steal your car, wreck it, kill the kid on the trike, then torch it, here's x amount of $ for your trouble.'

Mistakes are made. This is so small. I'm sure any damage will be paid for, no question.

[JC]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

It seems I don't share the popular opinion here, I can't agree with you.

Fair enough the 80 year old losing his marbles, but an organisation as big as the RACV must have some kind of protocol that needs to be followed before towing a vehicle, which was obviously ignored. That's negligence, not a simple mistake. What kind of morons allow a car to be towed without even checking who it belongs to? Surely the order to tow would have contained the car's rego, which obviously wouldn't have matched the member's car. This is after the RACV scout has already come out and assessed the situation; and by "assessed" I can only assume they showed up, couldn't be bothered to follow RACV's protocol then sent through the order to have it towed. I simply can't fathom how an organisation as large as the RACV could have employees so negligent. Unless of course it is the RACV's policy to tow any car that a member claims is theirs.

It's easy to call people knob heads because this kind of stupidity upsets them, but put yourself in the victim's shoes (yes, victim - her car was towed away and broken into while she was running around for God knows how long going through the stress of having your car stolen), if it happened to you I'm sure you'd be fuming. Anyone who says they wouldn't be upset about having their pride and joy towed then broken into cannot be serious. Think about it, whilst you are running around a carpark like an idiot, stressing about your car being stolen, a bunch of blokes have towed it away and are in the process of breaking into it, then going through your personal possessions inside the car before realising that it would have been alot easier to actually check the rego before towing it away.

Another thing, how stupid would the assessor ("poor old codger") have had to be?? First, let's identify the car as belonging to the member through the rego.. actually nah, really can't be bothered. Ok, the central locking doesn't work... how about we try the key manually? Oh, it doesn't fit. Interesting. Tow it fellas.

It's easy to sit at the computer and think about how much of a mountain people are making of this molehill, unless it was you in that car park and your car being taken away and broken into, as the result of an RACV employee's negligence. Flame suit at the ready.

Spot on - this is why this is such a disgrace. It's not the act of towing that should see the towie lose his job, it's the fact that procedures (reasonable ones no doubt) were not followed. Checking the rego is just common sense.

[GS608]

Originally Posted by JC

Spot on - this is why this is such a disgrace. It's not the act of towing that should see the towie lose his job, it's the fact that procedures (reasonable ones no doubt) were not followed. Checking the rego is just common sense.

How do you know they weren't followed? Rego would make zero difference if the car was towed under his membership (which allows any car you are using to be towed)

[JamesR]

This thread is full of these people..

[4bbl]

maybe we should ban tow trucks

[Jim Goose]

I still want my virgins...

[JamesR]

Originally Posted by 4bbl

maybe we should ban tow trucks

or old people...

[Full Noise]

For all of those people who think that this is an overreaction, I have a few simple questions.

How would you feel if this happened to your pride and joy?

How would you feel if you were in a hurry and found your car missing because of these circumstances?

How would you feel if you were unable to take a trolley load of shopping home or pick up your children from school, etc, because of these circumstances?

How happy would you be when a damaged window seal still hasn’t been repaired after two weeks?

So this was a mistake from the RACV, well I call it absolute incompetence.
Whenever I’ve had to speak with these clowns, they pretty much wont give you any information until you practically give then a DNA sample, so how can this happen?

As for the 81 year-old geriatric, well there seems to be a fair bit of info missing from the article.
It doesn’t say how long he’s owned the car for?
It doesn’t say if the car is the same colour as his?
It doesn’t even say if it’s the same model as his?

Some stupid old man just claims that it belongs to him. That’s OK, we believe you.

The RACV are now doing emergency house repairs. Well, I hope that the check that the people who ring actually own the house that they break into.

In my opinion, the RACV should have immediately given the young lady a loan car and repaired the vehicle. Free insurance for a year and compensation for any lost time of work should have been offered. Instead, in their arrogance, they’ve basically said…

RACV acted in good faith to assist a member who was adamant the vehicle was his.

So, that’s OK then. Oh, we’ll offer you $100 off one of our policies to shut you up.

Well f%&* you, RACV.

They could have turned this into a positive but instead, have shunned this girl. Why else would we be reading about it in the Herald Sun?

[Jim Goose]

As for the 81 year-old geriatric, well there seems to be a fair bit of info missing from the article.
It doesn’t say how long he’s owned the car for?
It doesn’t say if the car is the same colour as his?
It doesn’t even say if it’s the same model as his?

Some stupid old man just claims that it belongs to him. That’s OK, we believe you.

Yea fancy getting old and geriatric... shoulda dropped dead sooner.

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Yea fancy getting old and geriatric... shoulda dropped dead sooner.

Your words, personally, I think that he should have just handed his licence in.

Now that would make the world a safer place.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by JC

You're joking, right? Fair compensation would be in the $000's based on the mental anguish sustained.

The towie should be replaced as well.

In fact, I'm not sure the old bloke shouldn't be charged with conspiracy to steal.

The $100 insurance upgrade isn't enough. If she doesn't claim anything, the RACV lose nothing. I think a cash payment of at least $500, and a rental while the damage done to her window seal is fixed would also be in order.

The elderly man should be given an official police warning - his error caused the owner a lot of stress. I don't think for a minute he intended to steal another person's car - he just thought it was his. A judge would throw the charge out or let him off the hook, so it would be a waste of time charging him.

Really, its an error that should not have occurred - how many people don't know the rego of their own car? I know mine, my old car's that I sold 10 years ago, the three letters of the rego of 3 family member's cars, some of their old cars and some friends' cars. It shouldn't have got past the towie anyway. I've called the RACV when I locked the keys in. Had to show ID to prove I was the guy on the member records before he'd open it. Fortunately I didn't leave my wallet in there either.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by FFOracing

Storm in a teacup. Really. Get a grip. RACV tows the wrong car coz some old dodger has a brain fart.

Someone call the cops.

Brain fart is where you try and open the door on a car and your remote doesn't work. At this point you think something isn't right, you check your remote, you try the door handle and then you make sure it is yours. Most of us have done it, but twig after 2 seconds and keep looking. Calling the tow truck is a complete pooch screw.

[buggo]

To the people saying that the car was towed under the rule that any car can be towed by a member, this wasn't 'any' car. This was 'his' car, therefore the rego, assuming he updated his policy, would match. If it didn't match his policy, the key didn't open the door manually, clearly it's not his car.
Now I'm not saying the towie should be sacked, far from it. I'm just saying this girl deserves more than an upgraded policy. She doesn't even get money off, just a bit more for the same price. And what are the chances she'll make a claim in the next year, let alone requiring whatever that $100 buys.The RACQ lose nothing.

[302 XC]

80 year old should hand in their licence ???
Thats just to funny for words
A mate who is 74 years old would probably give most of you so called expert drivers a run for ya money,and no doubt give yas a hidin

Just remember people approaching 80 is happinig on a day occurance

[dom_105]

Anything I say would just be repeating Adrenaline, because he was spot on.

But on the RACV, what a massive fail of public relations. Complementary insurance for a year, free hire car, prompt repair of any damage they caused and chuck in a GPS or a CD Player and a bottle of wine. All these things would be a negligible cost to RACV, and would have probably kept this story out of the national press. It would have been a good PR outcome, and would have satisfied the victim in this incident.

All these big businesses all suck at PR and Customer Relations.