RAC - female drivers beware

dekaspace1

As a vulnerable male it's interesting, I am autistic so especially in my youth I was a major target even walking the streets at night in town centres as I stood out, I was even told it was my fault because I could of chosen to not go out or walked different routes.

I would say in a case like this anyone would be in danger because someone would know it's dark and target someone alone.

Albermarle

Since both the RAC and AA have been taken over by private equity etc. the service has gone down, staff morale is down, and prices are up.

I am surprised that any MSE'r is with them, when there are significantly cheaper alternatives.

teaselMay

Being alone may make someone feel vulnerable, and I'm sorry that you did OP.

But being in a built up area makes someone much safer than on a motorway, dual carriage way, blind corner, unlit country road, it's a whole different level of risk.

whatsthenews

cakespirit said:

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.

Thank you for sharing this. I would be frightened stuck like this in a city after dark. How frightened would depend on which city and what area of the city. Those saying that your vehicle is more likely to be hit if it's on an unlit country road, a dual carriageway or the hard shoulder of a motorway  are probably correct , however to say it's safer in a built up area is incorrect. Your vehicle might be less likely to be hit but if you look at crime stats then I'd hazard a guess that crime is higher in built up areas than on motorways or country roads. 
Glad you were able to get your OH to come and wait with you. 

sheramber

Slinky said:

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

Maybe there were 6 vulnerable callers waiting and only 4 breakdown operatives available. 
Maybe she did get priority, depending on what other calls were logged. 

Albermarle

Perhaps priority should not be based on lone female/male in a city, but where in that city the broken down vehicle is.
In every city there are some nice parts, where crime levels are low, and some dodgy areas, especially at night.

saajan_12

The vulnerable comparison is the more emotional part of this, but surely the more relevant is the level of service - 
1) Is that wait time reasonable for the service level RAC offer, in the context of an urgent rescue away from home (ie can't drive off without it). 
2) Are the time estimates reasonably accurate, especially if the customer might make alternative arrangements accordingly which turn out to be counter productive.

As even if the OP isn't considered any more or less vulnerable, RAC can't employ an unreasonably low number of drivers and take excessively long to reach people. I'm not sure if OP's case reaches that level, but surely at some point, they actually aren't providing the service and a cancellation / refund might be due for cause, ie not in line with the T&C which are about the customer just changing their mind. 

Pollycat

saajan_12 said:

The vulnerable comparison is the more emotional part of this

The OP appears to have edited her original post to remove the word 'vulnerable'.

whatsthenews

saajan_12 said:

The vulnerable comparison is the more emotional part of this, but surely the more relevant is the level of service - 
1) Is that wait time reasonable for the service level RAC offer, in the context of an urgent rescue away from home (ie can't drive off without it). 
2) Are the time estimates reasonably accurate, especially if the customer might make alternative arrangements accordingly which turn out to be counter productive.

As even if the OP isn't considered any more or less vulnerable, RAC can't employ an unreasonably low number of drivers and take excessively long to reach people. I'm not sure if OP's case reaches that level, but surely at some point, they actually aren't providing the service and a cancellation / refund might be due for cause, ie not in line with the T&C which are about the customer just changing their mind. 

I agree. I don't know what the contract says , but first page of the RAC website 
"Complete peace of mind for less

You know you’re getting breakdown cover you can trust with us – we’ve been doing this since 1897! Our expert patrols get to you in 60 mins or less, and we fix 4/5 on the spot"
Once you click the Start your Quote link 

MeteredOut

That says they get to "most" in 60 minutes or less. If I were a customer, I'd take that to mean >50% and would be asking for evidence of that.