RAC damaged my car

be96erj

I would appreciate some advise from anyone who knows about this topic (rather than opinion).


My car broke down the other day and the RAC were called out. After waiting 6 hours, the RAC man was unable start the car, so it was towed to the nearest garage. At the garage, they spotted that the car had been miss-fuelled (by my wife!)


Given that the RAC man should have spotted the problem straight away, his many attempts at trying to start my car and the permanent damage that he caused my engine (by trying to start it), would I be able to claim from RAC for a new engine?

Retrogamer

No, you wouldn't.

I'm guessing the car is a diesel, and your wife put petrol in it?

Either way, any engine damage is far more likely to have been caused when the engine was running, rather than when the RAC tried to start it.

goonarmy

If you brake down & aa/rac man tries to get you going how would you propose they do this without starting the car?

attila_

There's no proof that you weren't there 6 hours trying to start it damaging it even more.

What do you expect a break-down recovery firm do? It's sounds like you set them a trap and waited for them to catch!

captainawsome

Unless you was still on the fuel station forecourt and called them before you started the car no you cannot blame the RAC. You drove the car untill it stopped therefore all the damage was already done. Might be worth calling your insurance company for the repairs? Not sure if they would entertain a wrongly fuelled car but might be worth a try.

Horizon81

Where there's blame theres a claim LOL. Don't you think the damage was already done, hence why you called RAC in the first place?

gilbert_and_sullivan

You'd think the RAC would have issued their patrols with crystal balls ouija boards and tarot cards by now.

WTFH

Based on my experience of these matters, your wife damaged the car, so you need to sue her. She should have spotted the problem and not needed to call out the RAC. If the car had not broken down, the RAC would not have been called. And the reason the RAC were called is because the car broke down, which is 100% due to your wife. Sue her.

DUTR

WTFH wrote: »

Based on my experience of these matters, your wife damaged the car, so you need to sue her. She should have spotted the problem and not needed to call out the RAC. If the car had not broken down, the RAC would not have been called. And the reason the RAC were called is because the car broke down, which is 100% due to your wife. Sue her.

You beat me to it.

bestpud

Looking back through your posts, OP, you seem to be a bit of a chancer?

This is taking the mick well and truly though! You didn't seriously think it would work did you?

dacouch

I'm guessing due to the amount of traffic today that you were waiting for the RAC for circa 6 hours rather than the RAC man spending 6 hours trying to start the car