RAC refused to help breakdown because they had dogs inside the vehicle

adouglasmhor

Tiffany_Aching wrote: »

I don't understand why there is so much blame directed towards the RAC in this case. It is usual to send a smaller van out first to see if the problem can be sorted at the roadside.

I drive a long wheel base mini bus and I often transport a passenger in their wheelchair, with the chair fixed in place with tracking on the floor. It is not easy to carry this passenger using a seatbelt for a host of reasons, one being that they will constantly take it off and fight to move around the vehicle as they are unable to understand danger. Should we break down we are aware that we will be more difficult to recover than a bog-standard car. These ladies must have also been aware that they would not be a normal recovery - considering they were in a motor home with a large amount of dogs. It is simply not a case of hooking up a tow and bunging everyone in the cab with the driver.

We are covered by the RAC and have broken down twice - once on the motorway. Both times we have had a small van sent out first to see if the bus can be fixed at roadside, the time we broke down on the motorway they were unable to restart us. We then had to wait for 2 hours for a truck able to transport us to arrive, during that time I chose to stay in the bus with my passenger as there was no way we would have been able to get him and his wheelchair up the embankment and he was not safe to leave on his own. As we were in a vehicle which was more difficult to transport than a car we had to wait for the only trailer near to us to become available. On talking to the driver I found out that he had come from the next county.

It is normal for the RAC (and the AA who I used to belong to) to send a smaller van out first. It is also normal to have to wait a couple of hours for a larger tow vehicle.

I actually agree with all of this and have had similar experiences (once with a 4 tonne Bedford full of Ammunition - I could hardly leave that or unload it up the embankment).

I know it will not help the people and dogs involved but perhaps if they had carried a small breakdown kit to put behind their vehicle in the event of something like this, the lorry driver might not have hit them. Nothing outrageous, a couple of fold up warning triangles, a couple of battery operated flashing amber lanterns and some high vis vests.

lostinrates

Mojisola wrote: »

So they were travelling at night
- did they have several good torches in the car?
- a couple of flasks of hot drinks?
- several blankets/warm waterproof clothes?
- a plan for looking after the dogs if they broke down - a way to keep them warm and dry and safe?


The RAC did what any of the similar companies would do - send out a van to see if a roadside repair could be made. When that wasn't possible, a suitable tow truck had to be brought in. Unless you break down near to where the tow truck is kept, a long wait would have been inevitable.

I wonder what the people who have cancelled their RAC membership will do now. Join one of the other companies that has the same exceptions as the RAC or pay up for private recovery when they next break down?

I'm not hoohah ing about cancelling any policy (and if I were it would be pointless, I am not with rac!)

But I will be checking out breakdown cover, and making sure I have the number of a private recovery company near my home address who will collect me and the dogs in event of (very costly ) emergency I suppose. Unless people here can make better suggestion for an emergency plan please?

I think the thorsoak post' that they thought they had paid for' is an important point. If we think we have paid for it it doesn't mean we have and it is beholden on us to make sure we are covered adequately.

Mojisola

lostinrates wrote: »

I think the thorsoak post' that they thought they had paid for' is an important point. If we think we have paid for it it doesn't mean we have and it is beholden on us to make sure we are covered adequately.

Perhaps the recovery organisations will put the information about not taking domestic animals more prominently in their T&Cs after this furore.

Even though we have breakdown cover, we still make sure we can look after ourselves for a few hours if we do break down or get stuck in a jam after a major accident. It doesn't take a lot of thinking - what do we need to keep warm, dry, have a pee, have a snack and a drink and a torch to see what's happening. In winter, we add in a snow shovel and some other bits and pieces. During the recent stormy weather, the chain saw went in the boot as well.

lostinrates

Mojisola wrote: »

Perhaps the recovery organisations will put the information about not taking domestic animals more prominently in their T&Cs after this furore.

Even though we have breakdown cover, we still make sure we can look after ourselves for a few hours if we do break down or get stuck in a jam after a major accident. It doesn't take a lot of thinking - what do we need to keep warm, dry, have a pee, have a snack and a drink and a torch to see what's happening. In winter, we add in a snow shovel and some other bits and pieces. During the recent stormy weather, the chain saw went in the boot as well.

Frankly I think many people having chain saws in their boots would be less safe! DH uses one,I would not be safe. Plus, after the dogs, the snow shovel, enough warm stuff for us all, space for what we were going out to get our land rover is getting full, our smaller cars would be suffering over filling :rotfl:

There are reasonable precautions for the environs, and a chainsaw would be relevant to a minority of us, though some of course.

Mojisola

lostinrates wrote: »

Frankly I think many people having chain saws in their boots would be less safe! DH uses one,I would not be safe. Plus, after the dogs, the snow shovel, enough warm stuff for us all, space for what we were going out to get our land rover is getting full, our smaller cars would be suffering over filling :rotfl:

There are reasonable precautions for the environs, and a chainsaw would be relevant to a minority of us, though some of course.

I didn't say everyone should have a chainsaw - I was saying what we do.

A basic emergency kit doesn't take up that much room.

Principia_2

I've had a quick look online regarding advice on keeping your dogs/animals safe on the motorway if you break down. The consensus seems to be keep them in the car.

A small minority of sites say tie them securely IF it is safe to do so, otherwise leave them in the car. I would suggest that a cold dark night with 12 animals then it is a reasonable plan to have them kept in the car, particularly if they were crated.

As an aside the advice, if you are disabled or unable to deal with weather extremes, is also to stay in the car. However I assume that whichever breakdown service you used would then treat you as a priority and not leave you stranded even if you were in a motorhome.

adouglasmhor

Principia wrote: »

I've had a quick look online regarding advice on keeping your dogs/animals safe on the motorway if you break down. The consensus seems to be keep them in the car.

A small minority of sites say tie them securely IF it is safe to do so, otherwise leave them in the car. I would suggest that a cold dark night with 12 animals then it is a reasonable plan to have them kept in the car, particularly if they were crated.

As an aside the advice, if you are disabled or unable to deal with weather extremes, is also to stay in the car. However I assume that whichever breakdown service you used would then treat you as a priority and not leave you stranded even if you were in a motorhome.

The RAC had in fact arranged recovery despite having had a get out in their conditions, sadly the accident happened before the specialised vehicle needed arrived.

Person_one

Principia wrote: »

A small minority of sites say tie them securely IF it is safe to do so, otherwise leave them in the car. I would suggest that a cold dark night with 12 animals then it is a reasonable plan to have them kept in the car, particularly if they were crated.

Absolutely. 12 dogs, three humans, an overgrown and inhospitable embankment, freezing cold weather and traffic thundering past in the dark at 80mph or more?

No brainer, no way on earth would it be sensible or safe for them to get out of the vehicle. Its a much bigger risk than staying inside, not only to themselves but to everybody using the motorway. If a dog had got loose and onto the road because an owner with freezing cold hands lost their grip trying to hold 4 leads, then there could have been a much worse accident in which many people lost their lives.

thorsoak

Mojisola wrote: »

So they were travelling at night
- did they have several good torches in the car?
- a couple of flasks of hot drinks?
- several blankets/warm waterproof clothes?
- a plan for looking after the dogs if they broke down - a way to keep them warm and dry and safe?


The RAC did what any of the similar companies would do - send out a van to see if a roadside repair could be made. When that wasn't possible, a suitable tow truck had to be brought in. Unless you break down near to where the tow truck is kept, a long wait would have been inevitable.

I wonder what the people who have cancelled their RAC membership will do now. Join one of the other companies that has the same exceptions as the RAC or pay up for private recovery when they next break down?

As they were travelling in a MOTORHOME and had intending camping overnight Saturday for the show on the Sunday, it is reasonable to expect that they could (a) make a hot drink (b) would have sufficient blankets/bedding to keep 3 people warm and food sufficient for themselves and the 12 dogs.

As for people cancelling their RAC membership, this is what we did when we were taking part in dog shows, as I said in an earlier post. We chose to share our vehicle/travelling to shows with another couple - and he was a qualified ford motor mechanic, who could keep us on the road! Other dog-showers who knew of the RAC's policy did the same.

Obviously as years have gone by, people's awareness of this policy has diminished.

WTFH

The "headline" of the first post is slightly misleading.

A quick question: when the person called the RAC to say they had broken down, did they tell them about the dozen dogs?