RAC - female drivers beware

cakespirit

I’d like to share a cautionary tale about the RAC Roadside Breakdown cover - particularly to any other female drivers who either have RAC breakdown cover or who are thinking of joining the RAC.

I broke down in an inner city street 20 miles from home recently, on a mid week evening and requested a roadside recovery just before 9.00pm.  The RAC recovery vehicle finally came to me just after 1.00am!
As a lone woman this would have meant sitting in the car in an inner city street in total darkness, so as not to draw attention to myself - for 4 hours.

(Unbeknown to the RAC I’m lucky enough to be married to a real knight of the road. As soon as it became obvious that no-one was coming out to help me any time soon he drove to Bristol to wait with me.  In other circumstances this would have been a distressing ordeal).

When I wrote to complain about the time I was left in an unsafe situation, the RAC couldn’t reassure me that this was in anyway an exceptional case.  In other words the same thing could well happen to me again if I needed to call on them in the future.

They also couldn’t explain why the ETAs I received on their app while I waited, appeared to be random and at times very alarming.  Just before the recovery finally came at 1.00am the last ETA I received for the recovery vehicle was from between 4.30am to 7.30am!

My confidence in the reliability of the RAC breakdown service had gone.  I couldn't risk this happening to me again at a time and distance from home where my husband wouldn't be able to come and wait with me for safety.  I therefore cancelled my membership.

But it doesn’t end there…..

There was still 9 months of the (expensive £282.99) cover left to run.  RAC however returned less than a third to me.  When I queried the amount of membership fee they were keeping, they told me they had charged me for the call out I made retrospectively.  This was because I’d  now cancelled my membership.  Even though it was due to the unreliability of that call out that made me want to cancel the policy to find a safer service elsewhere!

It's in their terms and conditions apparently - but given the reason for my cancellation I feel this is very wrong. 

There has been no apparent recognition whatsoever from the RAC over this time, via its service or responses to my complaint,  of the importance of personal safety to lone female drivers when they break down at night and/or in an isolated location.

Penguin_

As far as I can see this has nothing to do with you being female at all. 

teaselMay

I was about to say exactly what Penguin has. This has nothing to do with being female and everything to do with a busy service probably prioritising people in much more vulnerable positions than you were.

I'm surprised you got any refund, when I bought different cover with my insurance the few months overlap with RAC wasn't refundable

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Penguin_ said:

As far as I can see this has nothing to do with you being female at all. 

I think OP's point is the RAC say they will give priority to vulnerable customers, which includes lone females, and OP feels that wasn't the case in this instance  

(I'm not passing comment either way).

Maybe one for Praise Vents and Warnings.  

DullGreyGuy

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Penguin_ said:

As far as I can see this has nothing to do with you being female at all. 

I think OP's point is the RAC say they will give priority to vulnerable customers, which includes lone females, and OP feels that wasn't the case in this instance  

(I'm not passing comment either way).

Maybe one for Praise Vents and Warnings.  

It is sexist to assume that a person is vulnerable simply because they are female.  Whilst women are more likely to suffer domestic violence etc its men that actually are more than twice as likely to be attacked by a stranger and so arguably they are the more vulnerable in an urban setting. 

It's always going to be a case of who's the most vulnerable and who else is claiming at the same time. A single female wheelchair user broken down with their new born baby is likely to trump a lone female. Urban is generally considered safer than rural settings. You can be lucky and call on a quiet day with the recovery truck having just finished a job 2 streets away and they come in under 30 minutes. Or you can be unlucky and the 5 local trucks have all been called to long distance recoveries to more vulnerable people and so you are going to be waiting. 

No matter which firm you go with you will find stories of people waiting 6 hours plus.

cakespirit said:
I therefore cancelled my membership.

But it doesn’t end there…..

There was still 9 months of the (expensive £282.99) cover left to run.  RAC however returned less than a third to me.  When I queried the amount of membership fee they were keeping, they told me they had charged me for the call out I made retrospectively.  This was because I’d  now cancelled my membership.  Even though it was due to the unreliability of that call out that made me want to cancel the policy to find a safer service elsewhere!

Your lucky they gave you any refund at all... had it been a Home or Car insurance policy instead then you do not get any refund if you attempt to cancel the policy after making a claim. The fact they allowed you to reimburse them the cost of the call out and refund the difference is fairly generous. 

FlorayG

All recovery services are like that now. Gone are the days when you could get  someone out within 30 minutes; 3-4 hours is normal now and 6-7 hours not unusual

Slinky

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Penguin_ said:

As far as I can see this has nothing to do with you being female at all. 

I think OP's point is the RAC say they will give priority to vulnerable customers, which includes lone females, and OP feels that wasn't the case in this instance  

(I'm not passing comment either way).

Maybe one for Praise Vents and Warnings.  

It seems that the promises made by breakdown companies after the murder of Marie Wilks on the M50 to prioritise lone women are not perhaps as prominent as they were.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Marie_Wilks

teaselMay

The hard shoulder is an inherently extremely dangerous place for any person on it, ~100 people a year are killed on it in the UK, by other traffic

MattMattMattUK

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Penguin_ said:

As far as I can see this has nothing to do with you being female at all. 

I think OP's point is the RAC say they will give priority to vulnerable customers, which includes lone females, and OP feels that wasn't the case in this instance  

(I'm not passing comment either way).

Maybe one for Praise Vents and Warnings.  

Generally this is treated as people on motorways and duel carriageways (far higher possibility of being crashed into), people on remote country roads (far higher possibility of being crashed into), the disabled, potentially elderly depending on circumstances, although not all elderly people are vulnerable. Someone in a town or city is generally regarded as being safe, so the will not be prioritised.

born_again

I'm afraid like many services such as this, there are limited staff & there is no idea if other people are a higher priority. 

Maybe try AA. Although I'm sure you will find other horror stories.

A member of care staff visiting a neighbour broke down in front of our drive yesterday (snow had pulled engine cover off) while we (neighbours) were out clearing snow on drives & road. Meaning I could not get out 🤷‍♀️
She called AA & was told at least a hour. Not surprising given the weather. Told her to get to patient & we would come & get her when they arrived. 
Only took 30 mins. Poor lady did not have time to finish her cup of tea with old lady. AA Just took engine cover off & we got her going.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

DullGreyGuy said:

It is sexist to assume that a person is vulnerable simply because they are female.  Whilst women are more likely to suffer domestic violence etc its men that actually are more than twice as likely to be attacked by a stranger and so arguably they are the more vulnerable in an urban setting. 

It's always going to be a case of who's the most vulnerable and who else is claiming at the same time. A single female wheelchair user broken down with their new born baby is likely to trump a lone female. Urban is generally considered safer than rural settings. You can be lucky and call on a quiet day with the recovery truck having just finished a job 2 streets away and they come in under 30 minutes. Or you can be unlucky and the 5 local trucks have all been called to long distance recoveries to more vulnerable people and so you are going to be waiting. 

No matter which firm you go with you will find stories of people waiting 6 hours plus.

MattMattMattUK said:

Generally this is treated as people on motorways and duel carriageways (far higher possibility of being crashed into), people on remote country roads (far higher possibility of being crashed into), the disabled, potentially elderly depending on circumstances, although not all elderly people are vulnerable. Someone in a town or city is generally regarded as being safe, so the will not be prioritised.

Like I said no comment, I'm just explaining the OP's point   I recalled something about this and from a quick Google at some point the AA got backlash on Twitter for saying lone females were not a priority so they changed their tune, the RAC and Green Flag then also said lone females were a priority.

Edit: Link here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60075906