RAC won’t pay up after breakdown driver bashed car
J.R. writes: I am caught in a merrygo-round involving the RAC. I called the company last December to get my broken-down car to a local garage in Southport, Merseyside. My car was then damaged by the towtruck driver while he was lowering it down the ramp from his truck, with me and the garage owner watching. I found RAC Recoveries had subcontracted the towing to Fylde Motor Company, which subcontracted it to a self-employed truck operator. All I know is that his name is Martin. I am insured with the RAC but, though the accident was not my fault, I was obliged to pay a £476 excess. I now have an insurance claim listed against me, which has increased my premiums. My wife’s insurance costs also rose as I was a named driver on her policy. THE pile of paperwork you sent me shows that you tried to get someone – anyone – to take responsibility and accept that whoever was to blame for the accident, it was not you. But you found yourself caught in a tangled web, with the RAC, its solicitors, Fylde Motor Company and your insurers, swapping letters but getting nowhere.
As part of your RAC membership you had legal expenses cover, so you had expected the solicitor, Minster Law, of York, to advise the RAC to pick up the bill for the damage and excess. After all, it was the RAC you called to get your car towed, and you did not choose to pass the job on.
But Minster Law told you that it had gone after Fylde Motor Company, which had refused to admit liability. The solicitor added that ‘a full investigation could not be carried out’, though it is hard to see why not. You were left as a member of an organisation that is supposed to assist drivers, yet on the face of it your claim was against the RAC and it could claim against Fylde Motor Company.
The solicitor engaged by the RAC under your legal expenses cover seemed reluctant to pick a fight with the RAC. Instead, it sent you a cheque for £476 to cover the insurance excess, saying it was ‘in full and final settlement of your claim’. The covering letter made no mention of the bill for the repairs to your car. Your insurer, Liverpool Victoria (LV), confirmed that the repair costs were still outstanding, meaning the incident would carry on affecting your premiums.
I pressed the RAC on this. It said it was ‘working hard with all parties to help ensure a successful resolution’, but there were delays because of ‘the recovery driver taking an extended holiday’ that had held up investigations. This was ridiculous. Legally, your relationship was with the RAC. I asked: ‘Shouldn’t it be for the RAC to meet Mr R’s costs or losses and then do its best to recover any outlay from other parties? Isn’t this what membership of the RAC is all about?’ Back came the RAC’s response. It had obtained LV’s agreement to treat the incident as a ‘no-fault’ claim.
In addition, the RAC is now offering you £100 as a gesture of goodwill. That’s more like it.
Of course, this means LV is out of pocket, unless Fylde Motor Company coughs up.
I invited Steven Weare, the boss of the Preston-based firm, to comment. He tried to play dumb, saying he had received no complaint from you and making it appear that he knew nothing about the incident. I made it clear that I had seen copies of his offers to settle the claim privately, without any admission of liability. I haven’t heard another word from him since.
But I hope LV is not left to foot the bill. That would be just as unfair as demanding that you meet the costs yourself.