Breakdown Cover & Dogs (1 Viewer)

camcondor

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
1,034
480
East Midlands
Funster No
23
MH
A Class
Unfortunately, this is fairly average in busy times. Don't forget the road had been closed - and recovery vehicles are currently not allowed to use the hard shoulder unless authorised by the Police - otherwise they have to sit in the traffic too!

A30 Temple Bank Holiday- 9 vehicles to be recovered (overheating) We had to sit for 2 hours the same as everyone else to get to them, took two families at a time, crammed them in and back to base. Each relay took 4 hours to complete including loading/unloading...people had waited 6 hours each on average that day. It happens!



Recovery is just recovery - they are not allowed to do anything else! It is nice to have Police rearguard - that is something that is done when available. If no Police/HA are available you are on your own....it isn't nice for the person broken down, or the recovery driver dodging the traffic!



The motorhome was a sighwritten motorhome, which was there to document a dog show as that is what the newspaper/journal is about. It had cameras and other filming equipment on board for doing this - it would be very hard to say anything other than it was being used for business, and was loaded with that equipment. Even if you are taking your own dog, it makes no difference as the trip is for reward/business. You need documention for this as it is classed as animal transport.

No different than if you borrowed a taxi driver friends cab to get to work one day for example. You may only be doing your own private journey - but you need a licence to drive it - even though it would be privately used.

No-one is picking holes, it is just the facts need to be facts. It was a tragic accident, there is no doubt about that - but it is not uncommon and happens all the time!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-14567676

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...news/recovery-driver-hit-by-car-on-m60-800183

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/mourners-pay-tribute-break-down-recovery-1833221

There are dozens and dozens of reported incidences I could post up.

All the flashing lights in the world will not protect you - every day there are near misses and incidences where people have hit recovery vehicles recovering people.

Nonsense, what a miserable attitude! Lots of know-it-alls on here as far as the "business" aspects are concerned as well. The dogs may not have been part of any business at all, just pet show dogs getting a lift with their owners friend. And if the RAC did not want to recover the motorhome because of "business use" they could have told the ladies that when they reported the breakdown so they could have arranged an alternative. The motorhomes insurance could also be perfectly in order for business.

As for recovery call centre operators not being "allowed" to inform the police- well, that is nonsense- I know that from personal experience with a breakdown myself. The operator informed me that the police would be advised as it was a major road and could pose a danger.

In any event, the motorhome along with the dogs inside it, in their crates, could easily have been recovered with a suitable low loader, so there should not have been an issue with the dogs.

The real issue is why the ladies were left in a dangerous position for 3 hours without the recovery service bothering to inform the police.

This forum seems to have become a microcosm of current British society - there are a lot of caring, decent people who would go out of their way to help others, and there are a lot of animal lovers here too. Sadly, there is also a group of animal/ dog haters and know-it-alls on here as well who seem keen on displaying a callous, couldn't care less attitude about the wellbeing of other people and their much loved pets and seem to revel in the misfortune of others. :Eeek: Thats the price of very large forums, I suppose, its not as friendly or as cosy as it was in the early days, that is for sure.

I also well known for saying it exactly as it is and I also couldn't care less if the nasty bunch don't like it, they can lump it! :Eeek:
 

camcondor

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
1,034
480
East Midlands
Funster No
23
MH
A Class
Dave, just to add my opinion-I certainly do not agree with some of your allegations and am very disappointed in your attitude. What a shame, reduces the options I have for some work I had looked to contact you for needing an experienced motorhome engineer but its as well if we are all very clear about just who we are and what our core beliefs are :Eeek:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

dave newell

Free Member
Oct 31, 2008
3,262
4,369
Telford, Shropshire
Funster No
4,733
MH
Home converted PVC
Exp
26yrs
Dave, just to add my opinion-I certainly do not agree with some of your allegations and am very disappointed in your attitude. What a shame, reduces the options I have for some work I had looked to contact you for needing an experienced motorhome engineer but its as well if we are all very clear about just who we are and what our core beliefs are :Eeek:

Well I suppose this is the risk I take by taking part in a discussion rather than confining myself to threads where I may score a job or two:Doh:.

I am frankly amazed that anyone would rule out a business doing any work for them because the owner has a different viewpoint on a totally unrelated subject, better not tell anyone what I think about football, rugby, any other popular sport or my views on politics then. Oh well Say Lavvy as they say over the water, live long and prosper Camconder.

D.
 

johnp10

Free Member
Oct 12, 2009
7,774
15,181
North Lincolnshire
Funster No
8,872
MH
C Class
Exp
8 years ish
The real issue is why the ladies were left in a dangerous position for 3 hours without the recovery service bothering to inform the police.

This forum seems to have become a microcosm of current British society - there are a lot of caring, decent people who would go out of their way to help others, and there are a lot of animal lovers here too. Sadly, there is also a group of animal/ dog haters and know-it-alls on here as well who seem keen on displaying a callous, couldn't care less attitude about the wellbeing of other people and their much loved pets and seem to revel in the misfortune of others. :Eeek: Thats the price of very large forums, I suppose, its not as friendly or as cosy as it was in the early days, that is for sure.

I also well known for saying it exactly as it is and I also couldn't care less if the nasty bunch don't like it, they can lump it! :Eeek:




  • Last comments on this issue:

    The ladies' situation could have been made safer had they followed the basic advice given repeatedly in the media, which is to get away from the vehicle and stay away until a larger vehicle (sent for) arrived to recover the MH.

    There is no group of animal / dog haters on here, just some who don't accept that the dog / dog owner is always right.
    Sometimes they are, but not always.
    Also there is no callous, couldn't care less attitude to others, but there are those who wont always agree just because it is required of them.
    There are good folk on here with differing outlooks on things, who will express opinions and then be prepared justify / defend them.

    THAT is debate.

    Accepting your sole opinions as the right and proper way of all things ISN'T debate.

    No one has insulted you or anyone else regarding this or any other issue, yet your contributions usually do verge on the offensive.
    Why is this?
    Why do your posts have to be confrontational?
    Can you not counter a post or make your point without insults?

    As for lumping it, so can you.

    Nasty bunch.:ROFLMAO:

    I'm done.
 
Last edited:

camcondor

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
1,034
480
East Midlands
Funster No
23
MH
A Class
Well I suppose this is the risk I take by taking part in a discussion rather than confining myself to threads where I may score a job or two:Doh:.

I am frankly amazed that anyone would rule out a business doing any work for them because the owner has a different viewpoint on a totally unrelated subject, better not tell anyone what I think about football, rugby, any other popular sport or my views on politics then. Oh well Say Lavvy as they say over the water, live long and prosper Camconder.

D.

Football, rugby and politics are somewhat different than fundamental values Dave. It isn't just a "different viewpoint" you have :Eeek: it is a fundamental difference in the way we see others :Eeek:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Nov 30, 2009
6,543
148,326
Pickering
Funster No
9,521
MH
PVC the PUG
Exp
Since 2009 with motorhomes several caravans then tents before that.
Ralph and Bev,

Wha on earth are you on about" they should have had cover," why do you think they and I are members of the RAC, that is cover if you break down, I am looking into my membership with the RAC yes I hold them responsible, and then the lorry driver, JMOP.

Well they obviously did NOT have cover to take the dogs:Sad:

If they had , all the dogs would have been taken along with the people , to a place of safety.
Even if the Motorhome was left till a big enough pick up could get it.
The fact is 12 :whatthe:dogs were left and the people stayed with them.
In the vehicle instead of moving to safety. :Doh:

They , the drivers of the MH should , in hind site , got someone to pick the dogs up in a van . If the recovery vehicle wouldn't do it.
Then we all wouldn't be arguing the toss and falling out about somebody else's lack of judgement .
Blaming the recovery man is wrong.
The woman who transported the dogs regularly in the vehicle for her business ,should have made sure she was fully covered , for such incidence. It was her fault.

At least she only has the dogs deaths on her conscience , which must be bad enough. It could have been a lot worse.
The dogs could have run up the motorway , making a car to swerve to avoid them. Causing a massive pile up . Killing innocent families going about their business .
 

dave newell

Free Member
Oct 31, 2008
3,262
4,369
Telford, Shropshire
Funster No
4,733
MH
Home converted PVC
Exp
26yrs
Football, rugby and politics are somewhat different than fundamental values Dave. It isn't just a "different viewpoint" you have :Eeek: it is a fundamental difference in the way we see others :Eeek:


Now you've lost me I'm afraid. I don't think less of the persons involved in this unfortunate incident than you, I just think they should accept that a fair part of their predicament was brought upon themselves by themselves. They ignored the oft repeated advice to leave the vehicle and move as far away as possible, not only is this advice oft repeated in the media but it was told to them by the RAC control centre. "But it was cold so lets ignore the sensible advice and wait in the motorhome until a truck either turns up to rescue us or wipes us out"! Sadly the latter happend before the former. But I'm in the wrong for thinking that the three women made a mistake of judgement? Really?

Obviously not everybody has seen the results of large trucks hitting stationary vehicles at speed but I have, I've also seen a 44 Tonner run off the M5, completely off I mean, as in across the hard shoulder through the Armco barriers and carrening down a 20 foot drop into a field where it landed in a big ugly mess on its side. Again caused by a nearside front blowout so not the driver's fault. This is why the advice is so often repeated: If you break down or suffer a puncture on the motorway, call the rescue services and get away from the vehicle, as far away as is reasonably possible!

I still haven't figured out what "allegations" I've made either.

D.
 

jonandshell

Free Member
Dec 12, 2010
5,476
8,299
Norfolk
Funster No
14,648
MH
Not got one!
Exp
Since 2006
It happened, people got hurt, dogs got killed, it was the fault of the driver who put his lorry into the back of a stationary vehicle.

Not much else to say.

I speak from a position of authority after a friend of mine, distracted at the wheel, drive his lorry into the back of stationary cars on the motorway, killing an elderly driver.
My friend, he's just gone to prison for 4 1/2 years for death by dangerous driving. His fault, he's paying the price.
The victim, he's still dead.

No debate on the incident can change any of that.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

camcondor

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
1,034
480
East Midlands
Funster No
23
MH
A Class
No, not all knowing.
I leave that to you.
Yes, it must be nice. Is it?

I will express an opinion, which others are free to disagree with.
Yours, on the other hand, are obviously correct in every aspect (because they are yours) and therefore unassailable.
I may not agree, but I will respect yours and others' opinions.
Please afford me the same courtesy without resorting to insults.

I say the vehicle is an "animal transporter" because of the number of animals carried. "A few small dogs" hardly covers 12.
Business use: read Rainbow Chaser's last post.

I agree with Graham.
The women could have called the Police, rather than relying on RAC, could they not?

I don't profess to be an insurance expert either.
I was just wondering how the claim would go down, nothing more.
If that's ok with you, that is.

Maz,
Not a dog hater at all.
I just don't accept that everyone but the dog owner is wrong.

Well for the record, I certainly don't agree with you and the rest of the sanctimonious, dog-hating crew who seem to pop up here.

As I pointed out, a person under severe stress cannot always be expected to know the intricacies about breakdowns, hence the reason we buy recovery policies. The RAC could and should have advised the police of this potentially lethal situation. I was told that they are routinely trained to do this. Obviously the call centre in this case didn't bother. Could the woman have done it? As I said, traumatic experiences sometimes mean people do not always think straight. The call centre should have advised the police or advised her to do it. They did not.

It was a motorhome, not an "animal transporter". It simply had crated dogs plus their owners in it, going to a show. And conveying dogs to a show is not necessarily a "business". Many people who show dogs do so as a hobby, not as a business. A "kennel" name is merely to cover the odd litter or two they might breed in a year. 12 small dogs between 2 or 3 breed aficianados is not exactly a massive number.

I do not appreciate your insults and nastiness either. And no, you will NOT stop me from disagreeing with some of the plainly offensive diatribe against these poor women and their dogs. So get over it. :Eeek:
 

daisy mae

Free Member
Mar 12, 2013
675
597
Leicestershire
Funster No
25,079
MH
C class Coachbuilt
Exp
I`m a newbie, now 1 year
camcondor, I am with you on this one, in the first place it was not the motor home that was at fault, they broke down, rang for help did not get it end of, left for 3 hours is not acceptable in any circumstances.

And where did the business come in, I have friends who shows dogs, my pollyanna`s breeders show their six, but they are not in business it is a hobby.

If anyone thinks that if I broke down on the motorway, I would get out and leave my dogs to their fate, is barking up the wrong tree,pardon the pun intentional, I would get them out if possible and they would be with me, the ladies couldn`t do that as their door was on the wrong side, ie road side, if police were called they could have coned it off at least they would have had a chance.

A few years ago two friends of my daughters, two sisters, one 16 the other 18 where killed on the hard shoulder, they had broken down, out of the four in the car, three were dead, reason a lorry, whose driver had wedge a length of wood on to the accelerator pedal, common practice at night it turned out. My last comment on this I am too upset.Apart from think I will keep off motor ways, cannot take the risk.
 

sdc77

Free Member
Jan 28, 2013
3,244
4,550
Weardale, Co Durham
Funster No
24,456
MH
Coachbuilt
Exp
since 2011
I'm a dog lover
Its very sad the dogs died..
The responsibility for them lies with the driver..
Its not a new thing.. Leave your vehicle if it breaks down.. Do not sit in it. If you're responsible enough to drive a group of people and dogs around then you should be responsible enough to get yourself and your passengers away from the vehicle if it breaks down on the motorway . (move the dogs too of course)
To leave people and animals on the hard shoulder was irresponsible.
Please don't call me a dog hater for stating the obvious.
The lorry driver.. If found to be guilty of an offence will be punished..
Its all about personal responsibility isn't it... And not wildly looking round for someone else to blame.
Turns out my better half knows the driver..

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Sep 23, 2007
1,702
1,966
Leicestershire
Funster No
347
MH
A Class
Exp
4 and many as a tugger
How different this thread would be, if the out come was the same but they had only been they half an hour.
 

rainbow chasers

Free Member
Oct 30, 2009
3,680
1,725
Mid Cornwall
Funster No
9,132
MH
Various
Exp
9
Nonsense, what a miserable attitude! Lots of know-it-alls on here as far as the "business" aspects are concerned as well. The dogs may not have been part of any business at all, just pet show dogs getting a lift with their owners friend. And if the RAC did not want to recover the motorhome because of "business use" they could have told the ladies that when they reported the breakdown so they could have arranged an alternative. The motorhomes insurance could also be perfectly in order for business.

As for recovery call centre operators not being "allowed" to inform the police- well, that is nonsense- I know that from personal experience with a breakdown myself. The operator informed me that the police would be advised as it was a major road and could pose a danger.

In any event, the motorhome along with the dogs inside it, in their crates, could easily have been recovered with a suitable low loader, so there should not have been an issue with the dogs.

The real issue is why the ladies were left in a dangerous position for 3 hours without the recovery service bothering to inform the police.

This forum seems to have become a microcosm of current British society - there are a lot of caring, decent people who would go out of their way to help others, and there are a lot of animal lovers here too. Sadly, there is also a group of animal/ dog haters and know-it-alls on here as well who seem keen on displaying a callous, couldn't care less attitude about the wellbeing of other people and their much loved pets and seem to revel in the misfortune of others. :Eeek: Thats the price of very large forums, I suppose, its not as friendly or as cosy as it was in the early days, that is for sure.

[HI]I also well known for saying it exactly as it is and I also couldn't care less if the nasty bunch don't like it, they can lump it![/HI] :Eeek:

We agree on something.....I don't suffer fools - so I am quite happy to spell things out to you in a direct manner knowing you won't be offended.

The Vehicle was a BUSINESS vehicle and was SIGNWRITTEN with the company name. Regardless of who intended to do what THAT DAY - it would be insured and have recovery for BUSINESS USE...for a whole year!....Common Sense (apparently)

THE COMPANY that OWNED the motorhome and EMPLOYED the women stated in the paper report that it had be on the way to DOCUMENT A SHOW FOR THE PAPER, and they had LOST CAMERA AND FILMING EQUIPMENT. That is what they call BUSINESS USE.

The purpose of its' business use being brought up was in response stating that the driver refused them - which was incorrect (as no driver ever arrived, refused them, their dogs or their vehicle) The point being - if a business vehicle, it would be covered for the animals, vehicle etc. as part of the business. That is the only relevance

I NEVER said that call centre staff are not allowed to call for assistance. LEARN TO READ CAREFULLY - I said, that REARGUARD IS GIVEN IF AVAILABLE and that RECOVERY DRIVERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE HARD SHOULDER TO AVOID TRAFFIC QUEUES - THEY WAIT WITH EVERYONE ELSE. (Unless police specify and supply an escort)

YOU DO NOT KNOW if the recovery company informed the Police or not - so don't assume!

THERE WAS NO ISSUE WITH THE DOGS - THEY WERE NEVER REFUSED. A NUMBER of reports have confirmed that they were STILL WAITING for recovery to ARRIVE. They WOULD have been taken - WHEN THE TRUCK ARRIVED! NO TRUCK HAD TURNED UP OR REFUSED THEM.....According to the statement of WOMAN THERE.

NOBODY ARE DOG HATERS.... That is childish, unhelpful and pathetic response to other people trying to save your embarrassment from ranting on with INCORRECT INFORMATION, which could be seen as verging on Libel, as it is based on your personal assumptions and is totally ignorant of facts that emerge as the story develops - no-one minds someone getting something wrong in the early reports. But ignoring the facts, making accusations and attacking people is foolhardy.

People on here are kind and friendly, and will actively help each other find out the TRUTH in cases such as this without judgement - some people don't like being wrong - others have more integrity.

I am not going to support your posts and say you are right when you are so wrong with your information. Supply me with evidence that what you say is correct, and I will change my view. But currently, every statement released, every interview given by those involved in the incident says that your accusations are nothing more that fantasy.
 

camcondor

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
1,034
480
East Midlands
Funster No
23
MH
A Class
We agree on something.....I don't suffer fools - so I am quite happy to spell things out to you in a direct manner knowing you won't be offended.

The Vehicle was a BUSINESS vehicle and was SIGNWRITTEN with the company name. Regardless of who intended to do what THAT DAY - it would be insured and have recovery for BUSINESS USE...for a whole year!....Common Sense (apparently)

THE COMPANY that OWNED the motorhome and EMPLOYED the women stated in the paper report that it had be on the way to DOCUMENT A SHOW FOR THE PAPER, and they had LOST CAMERA AND FILMING EQUIPMENT. That is what they call BUSINESS USE.

The purpose of its' business use being brought up was in response stating that the driver refused them - which was incorrect (as no driver ever arrived, refused them, their dogs or their vehicle) The point being - if a business vehicle, it would be covered for the animals, vehicle etc. as part of the business. That is the only relevance

I NEVER said that call centre staff are not allowed to call for assistance. LEARN TO READ CAREFULLY - I said, that REARGUARD IS GIVEN IF AVAILABLE and that RECOVERY DRIVERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE HARD SHOULDER TO AVOID TRAFFIC QUEUES - THEY WAIT WITH EVERYONE ELSE. (Unless police specify and supply an escort)

YOU DO NOT KNOW if the recovery company informed the Police or not - so don't assume!

THERE WAS NO ISSUE WITH THE DOGS - THEY WERE NEVER REFUSED. A NUMBER of reports have confirmed that they were STILL WAITING for recovery to ARRIVE. They WOULD have been taken - WHEN THE TRUCK ARRIVED! NO TRUCK HAD TURNED UP OR REFUSED THEM.....According to the statement of WOMAN THERE.

NOBODY ARE DOG HATERS.... That is childish, unhelpful and pathetic response to other people trying to save your embarrassment from ranting on with INCORRECT INFORMATION, which could be seen as verging on Libel, as it is based on your personal assumptions and is totally ignorant of facts that emerge as the story develops - no-one minds someone getting something wrong in the early reports. But ignoring the facts, making accusations and attacking people is foolhardy.

People on here are kind and friendly, and will actively help each other find out the TRUTH in cases such as this without judgement - some people don't like being wrong - others have more integrity.

I am not going to support your posts and say you are right when you are so wrong with your information. Supply me with evidence that what you say is correct, and I will change my view. But currently, every statement released, every interview given by those involved in the incident says that your accusations are nothing more that fantasy.


Well I am not going to support your posts either - I also do not suffer fools glady, so perhaps you should LEARN TO READ as well. Funny how many "heroes" emerge on here willing to abuse other forum users online. Wonder what the response would be face to face :Eeek: FWIW I don't rate you much either given your personalised insults about my apparent lack of integrity:Eeek::Eeek:

Perhaps you would like to repeat that in person to me? :Eeek: no, thought not.

Just because the vehicle was signwritten and carrying camera equipment, does not make the fact that it was conveying the dogs per se into a business. The filming is the business aspect.

People on here are unfortunately not all "kind and friendly" - that is simply inaccurate and untruthful. Many are, but a lot are not. And there are a lot of dog haters on here. Yes, they are childish, immature and pathetic to hate dogs, but that is as it is.

I never said, although others did, that a recovery driver refused to take the dogs- what I did say was that the recovery driver could have been more helpful to the ladies instead of being a jobswerth, even if his vehicle was too small to help with recovery. Likewise, the call centre could have let the police know. It appears that they did not.

Do try not to launch malevolent personal attacks on others who don't share your views. I disagree entirely with you, but that does not give you the right to question my integrity. :Eeek:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

rainbow chasers

Free Member
Oct 30, 2009
3,680
1,725
Mid Cornwall
Funster No
9,132
MH
Various
Exp
9
Perhaps you would like to repeat that in person to me? :Eeek: no, thought not.



People on here are unfortunately not all "kind and friendly" - that is simply inaccurate and untruthful. Many are, but a lot are not. And there are a lot of dog haters on here. Yes, they are childish, immature and pathetic to hate dogs, but that is as it is.

I never said, although others did, that a recovery driver refused to take the dogs- . Likewise, the call centre could have let the police know. It appears that they did not.

Do try not to launch malevolent personal attacks on others who don't share your views. I disagree entirely with you, but that does not give you the right to question my integrity. :Eeek:

[HI]"I don't rate you much either given your personalised insults" [/HI]

I am not insulting you - you are blinded from the facts by your views. I am merely pointing out (banging my head against a wall) that your views are based upon events that DID NOT HAPPEN according to witness accounts.

We have all posted views on what we had been given to go on at the time - these change as evidence becomes apparent in most cases. You views are based upon events since disproven.

[HI]
"Just because the vehicle was signwritten and carrying camera equipment, does not make the fact that it was conveying the dogs per se into a business. The filming is the business aspect."
[/HI]

The primary use (as seen in law) is business. That is where they were going, and what they were doing. Regardless of this - that vehicle would have everything in place to cover that - recovery for business, cover in place to take care of occupants, including the highly likely animal pressence.

They state the cages were custom made for the vehicle....so they would have been covered to have that many animals on board, and SHOULD have everything in place

What you are suggesting is that on Monday, you insure your car to go shopping - on Tuesday you insure your car to go to the tip. The car is insured and covered whatever you do. SAME WITH THIS VEHICLE.

What each person was doing is irrellevent - the company would or should have had cover in place for whatever that vehicle is being used for. In LAW it is a business vehicle.

[HI]
"what I did say was that the recovery driver could have been more helpful to the ladies instead of being a jobswerth, even if his vehicle was too small to help with recovery"
[/HI]

How can this be right, if no driver ever arrived??? According to the womans' testimony - no driver had arrived when the accident happened. She was about to phone the company as it had been 45 minutes, rather than the 30 they state.

Rearguard will be given if available. It depends on what else is going on in the area. A police vehicle could be an hour away! You have no idea if one was on it's way, or not available. If no-one is available as they are at other incidences, then you are alone. That is the way it is!

There are lots of things you can do with Hindsight. Many of the nasty people you talk of on here will tell you - I always advise people to take a tarp.....cost a pound each, gives you something to sit on, cover from sun, wind and rain. In her case, would have kept her and 12 dogs warm all for under a tenner!
So these forums are worthwhile aren't they?


What I am getting tired of saying is; there is NO-ONE to BLAME, it was a TRAGIC ACCIDENT that happens all the time!
 

sdc77

Free Member
Jan 28, 2013
3,244
4,550
Weardale, Co Durham
Funster No
24,456
MH
Coachbuilt
Exp
since 2011
Well I am not going to support your posts either - I also do not suffer fools glady, so perhaps you should LEARN TO READ as well. Funny how many "heroes" emerge on here willing to abuse other forum users online. Wonder what the response would be face to face :Eeek: FWIW I don't rate you much either given your personalised insults about my apparent lack of integrity:Eeek::Eeek:

Perhaps you would like to repeat that in person to me? :Eeek: no, thought not.

Just because the vehicle was signwritten and carrying camera equipment, does not make the fact that it was conveying the dogs per se into a business. The filming is the business aspect.

People on here are unfortunately not all "kind and friendly" - that is simply inaccurate and untruthful. Many are, but a lot are not. And there are a lot of dog haters on here. Yes, they are childish, immature and pathetic to hate dogs, but that is as it is.

I never said, although others did, that a recovery driver refused to take the dogs- what I did say was that the recovery driver could have been more helpful to the ladies instead of being a jobswerth, even if his vehicle was too small to help with recovery. Likewise, the call centre could have let the police know. It appears that they did not.

Do try not to launch malevolent personal attacks on others who don't share your views. I disagree entirely with you, but that does not give you the right to question my integrity. :Eeek:

Are you for real...
Offering people out in a post... Ranting..
You're turning what should be a sad occasion that people should learn from into some sort of personal vendetta again 'dog haters'
Your judgement may be clouded by the grief over these poor dogs death but you really should stick to facts.. (which are often lacking)

Here's a couple of simple facts.

If you break down on a motorway.. Do not stay in your vehicle. This advice is in the highway code.
https://www.gov.uk/breakdowns-and-incidents-274-to-287/additional-rules-for-motorways-275-to-278

Some people don't like dogs.. (I don't like cats.. Never thought of myself as a cat hater)

.. I'm glad the people in the motorhome survived.. Its sad about the dogs. If they had all been off the carriageway they may all have been uninjured and survived
 
Aug 27, 2009
19,788
23,032
Hertfordshire
Funster No
8,178
MH
Van Conversion
Exp
40 years
I have a different problem to the dog haters, I love my dog but my dog doesn't like me very much. What would you do in this situation.:Sad:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

GJH

LIFE MEMBER
Aug 20, 2007
29,450
38,828
Acklam, Teesside, originally Glossop
Funster No
127
MH
None, now sold
Exp
2006 to 2022
I've just had another look at Link Removed posted by Andyman yesterday. That article (from Dog World so hardly dog hating) contains the following paragraphs.
There has been much criticism of the RAC on various social media sites after its failure to send help within the time the vehicle was immobile. [HI]Ms Russell-Smith said the company told her they were having difficulty finding a vehicle to help them because of the dogs.[/HI]
"I told them all the dogs were in crates and they said that would be OK but that the vehicle would have to come from a long way away,” she said. [HI]"During our wait the Highways Agency phoned a couple of times to see what our situation was.”[/HI]
The RAC told DW: "We always attend broken-down vehicles carrying animals. [HI]As this incident involved a large motorhome we had to ensure the correct recovery vehicle attended.[/HI] Sadly for all concerned, the recovery vehicle was on its way when the accident happened. Our thoughts are with the injured passenger and the owners of the dogs that died.
"We are extremely saddened to learn that a young woman has been injured and that four dogs have lost their lives as a result of this incident. We had despatched a specialist recovery vehicle to attend, but unfortunately the accident occurred while the vehicle was en route to the scene.” The following day the company said it was reading comments and views made on social media sites.
"There is an ongoing internal review of this matter but at this time we would like to clarify the [HI]rumours that a patrol vehicle was sent out and left the scene are false[/HI]. It is absolutely RAC policy to attend breakdowns when animals are involved - t[HI]he delay occurred because we were arranging for a suitable specialist vehicle to attend the large motorhome[/HI]. The recovery team arrived shortly after the accident but were stood down by the police who were dealing with the incident.

The highlighting is mine but we all surely need to make any further comments in light of those facts (whatever our previous views based on lesser information).
 

camcondor

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
1,034
480
East Midlands
Funster No
23
MH
A Class
Are you for real...
Offering people out in a post... Ranting..

Here's a couple of simple facts.

Some people don't like dogs.. (I don't like cats.. Never thought of myself as a cat hater)

.. I'm glad the people in the motorhome survived.. Its sad about the dogs. If they had all been off the carriageway they may all have been uninjured and survived

Rainbow Chaser felt it quite ok to question my integrity so I will respond as I wish to that, thank you, whether you happen to like it or not. Just because I don't agree with him does not mean my integrity is under question:Eeek:

You forgot to add to your simple facts:

- some people don't like people who don't like dogs and are openly callous/abusive about it.

- just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they lack integrity

- just because you say something is so, does not mean that is the definitive answer. :Eeek:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

camcondor

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
1,034
480
East Midlands
Funster No
23
MH
A Class
[HI]"I don't rate you much either given your personalised insults" [/HI]

I am not insulting you - you are blinded from the facts by your views. I am merely pointing out (banging my head against a wall) that your views are based upon events that DID NOT HAPPEN according to witness accounts.

We have all posted views on what we had been given to go on at the time - these change as evidence becomes apparent in most cases. You views are based upon events since disproven.

[HI]
"Just because the vehicle was signwritten and carrying camera equipment, does not make the fact that it was conveying the dogs per se into a business. The filming is the business aspect."
[/HI]

The primary use (as seen in law) is business. That is where they were going, and what they were doing. Regardless of this - that vehicle would have everything in place to cover that - recovery for business, cover in place to take care of occupants, including the highly likely animal pressence.

They state the cages were custom made for the vehicle....so they would have been covered to have that many animals on board, and SHOULD have everything in place

What you are suggesting is that on Monday, you insure your car to go shopping - on Tuesday you insure your car to go to the tip. The car is insured and covered whatever you do. SAME WITH THIS VEHICLE.

What each person was doing is irrellevent - the company would or should have had cover in place for whatever that vehicle is being used for. In LAW it is a business vehicle.

[HI]
"what I did say was that the recovery driver could have been more helpful to the ladies instead of being a jobswerth, even if his vehicle was too small to help with recovery"
[/HI]

How can this be right, if no driver ever arrived??? According to the womans' testimony - no driver had arrived when the accident happened. She was about to phone the company as it had been 45 minutes, rather than the 30 they state.

Rearguard will be given if available. It depends on what else is going on in the area. A police vehicle could be an hour away! You have no idea if one was on it's way, or not available. If no-one is available as they are at other incidences, then you are alone. That is the way it is!

There are lots of things you can do with Hindsight. Many of the nasty people you talk of on here will tell you - I always advise people to take a tarp.....cost a pound each, gives you something to sit on, cover from sun, wind and rain. In her case, would have kept her and 12 dogs warm all for under a tenner!
So these forums are worthwhile aren't they?


What I am getting tired of saying is; there is NO-ONE to BLAME, it was a TRAGIC ACCIDENT that happens all the time!

Just to correct the inaccuracies in the tirade above:

1. You did direct very personal insults at me about my integrity :Eeek:

2. The information about business use is largely irrelevant as the RAC did not appear to make that into any sort of feature. On the other hand, you appear to believe that you are a business guru and your pronouncements are all correct in law. They are not. The vehicle was indeed covered for recovery, the RAC failed to do this in a timely manner - dogs died as a result and a person was severely injured.

3. My views are not based on "events since disproven."

4. A tarpaulin costing a pound would not have kept the dogs and the people "warm" in bitterly cold conditions. Its a bit of plasticised material, not a blanket. Just pointing it out for reasons of accuracy, not that its relevant to the situation, actually.
 

laneside

Funster
Deceased RIP
Aug 14, 2009
2,668
6,276
Oradour sur Vayres
Funster No
7,981
MH
Rapido V66
Exp
nowhere near long enough
This is another hole that is getting a fair bit muddy in the bottom-----I think it is time to stop digging

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

kglblue

Free Member
Nov 7, 2010
112
159
St.Agnes Cornwall
Funster No
14,373
MH
Coach built
Exp
6 years
Dogs

Very very sad, we are with Green flag via the caravan club. We broke down on the M20 and the recovery driver refused to take our one well behaved collie. We were on the hard shoulder for 8 hours. The caravan club were very good, a manager rang green flags head office and the recovery driver eventually relented and took us and our dog onto the services. The green flag service manager apologised and we were given a courtesy car so we and our dog could go home, and our van was delivered back to our home 2 days later. It was the sour faced recovery driver who was being awkward. He was a really miserable so and so!
Regards
Kenneth
 

sdc77

Free Member
Jan 28, 2013
3,244
4,550
Weardale, Co Durham
Funster No
24,456
MH
Coachbuilt
Exp
since 2011
Rainbow Chaser felt it quite ok to question my integrity so I will respond as I wish to that, thank you, whether you happen to like it or not. Just because I don't agree with him does not mean my integrity is under question:Eeek:

You forgot to add to your simple facts:

- some people don't like people who don't like dogs and are openly callous/abusive about it.

- just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they lack integrity

- just because you say something is so, does not mean that is the definitive answer. :Eeek:

You're still ranting (and staring at me with your big starey eyes)

:winky:
 
Last edited:

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Funsters who are viewing this thread

Back
Top