RAC Autowindscreens

uktim29

Wig wrote: »

Maybe one day I'll see you help someone.

You already have.;)

In this thread I've helped the op by telling him he should be more organized. You'll find all of my posts of a similar helpful nature!

Sooler

uktim29 wrote: »

Well it is unreasonable. It's not their fault you haven't got a clue where you've put anything. I have all stuff like that filed within arms reach of me now. It takes me 10 seconds to find anything.

Equally it’s not the OPs fault that the RAC haven’t a clue who’s paid and who hasn’t

10 seconds work must be worth 3p , if people are overcharged by 3p they soon complain so why do unpaid work for companies you don’t even work for

uktim29

Sooler wrote: »

Equally it’s not the OPs fault that the RAC haven’t a clue who’s paid and who hasn’t

10 seconds work must be worth 3p , if people are overcharged by 3p they soon complain so why do unpaid work for companies you don’t even work for

If I just grabbed a document I wouldn't think of it in terms of 3p, it would be 10 seconds. It almost takes longer to sneeze.

pinkshoes

womble12345 wrote: »

I spent 2 hours looking for my receipt, along
with calls to the RAC premium number and my insurer.

I understand that the FSA guidelines value my time at £10 an hour so I don't
think it unreasonable to ask for £25 to cover my time and phone calls, but
how do I go about this?

I had my car windscreen replaced about 18 months ago too! The receipt would be in my receipt box, in the envelope marked "March 2007". That would take me about 60 seconds to find.

I would then go to www.saynoto0780.com and type in the premium number to get a landline equivalent for RAC, which would take me about 2 minutes.

So, that's 3 whole minutes of my time so far, and no expensive phone call. At £10 an hour, that would be a whole £0.50 for me!!

How is it fair that you could claim FIFTY times the amount I would be "entitled" to claim, just because you're inefficient?

I suggest you file your receipts more carefully in future.

Sooler

May be rather than just sending out a blanket mail shot asking for payment to cutomers who they have no idea if they actually owe money or not, they ought to just ask and find out first.

Sooler

pinkshoes wrote: »

So, that's 3 whole minutes of my time so far, and no expensive phone call. At £10 an hour, that would be a whole £0.50 for me!!

Get your business head on, you should charge per hour or part there of , even stretch it out to 63 minutes

d.edna

Next when people breakdown they will be charging to call and wait for the RAC to come out to them

kiddy_guy

So the RAC lose a piece of paper which in theory should have taken them, 20 seconds to locate and instead of admitting their error and taking the hit they place the issue at the hands of the OP? The OP is entitled to acknowledgment and an apology as well as an offer of perhaps some form of discount in future or a goodwill gesture. Not £25 but a gesture for his time and effort. If the OP was a professional footballer, £25 would be for 1 seconds worth of work!

People are clearly forgetting that the OP has paid for a service. The RAC have an obligation to provide one that is accurate, rather than a slipshod effort that they have here.

d.edna

kiddy_guy wrote: »

So the RAC lose a piece of paper which in theory should have taken them, 20 seconds to locate and instead of admitting their error and taking the hit they place the issue at the hands of the OP? The OP is entitled to acknowledgment and an apology as well as an offer of perhaps some form of discount in future or a goodwill gesture. Not £25 but a gesture for his time and effort. If the OP was a professional footballer, £25 would be for 1 seconds worth of work!

Moral of the story is the OP should keep better records, gesture made.

People are clearly forgetting that the OP has paid for a service. The RAC have an obligation to provide one that is accurate, rather than a slipshod effort that they have here.

reading between the lines it was an insurance claim so technically he was paying his insurer not RAC directly as he isn't RACs client the insurer was.

peachyprice

kiddy_guy wrote: »

So the RAC lose a piece of paper which in theory should have taken them, 20 seconds to locate and instead of admitting their error and taking the hit they place the issue at the hands of the OP? The OP is entitled to acknowledgment and an apology as well as an offer of perhaps some form of discount in future or a goodwill gesture. Not £25 but a gesture for his time and effort. If the OP was a professional footballer, £25 would be for 1 seconds worth of work!

People are clearly forgetting that the OP has paid for a service. The RAC have an obligation to provide one that is accurate, rather than a slipshod effort that they have here.

I don't understand your reasoning, why is the OP entitled to a discount or goodwill gesture? All RAC did was send the OP a letter, he found the relevant receipt (not RAC's fault it took 2 hours to find), OP phoned them to tell them he'd paid. Where is the scope for being entitled to compensation?
It was a clerical error, it happens.

Now, if they'd taken money out of the OP's account it would be a whole different kettle of fish, but that isn't the case.