RACV tows wrong car from Chadstone car park

[fiery]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Forgiveness is a quality that seems to be strangely lacking in todays society.

There were so many things to quote upon in your posting geckoGT but that would only confuse those on here that have the strange thinking they don't make mistakes. So will just give a rep point instead for a post that was well said !!

Forgiveness and compassion.... gone way way out the window sadly :(

[mik]

Originally Posted by Bucknaked

I think it really depends on if theres damage to the vehicle. If not, then of course I'd be cranky, but whats done is done and theres no point chest beating when it won't achieve anything. The tow operator will be dealt with and while he's made an innocent mistake, if he's genuinely sorry, and you get repairs and an apology, then that should be end of story. I'd hate to see him lose his job over a genuine mistake. Who knows his personal circumstances and who this will affect his livelyhood.

good post Bucknaked.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

Gee there are some knobs in this thread, you Aussies are getting more like the Yanks everyday with your "sue them" & "I want compensation" mentality.

Poor old codger makes a mistake, then large organisation makes a mistake and all hell breaks loose, get over it.

Sad & pathetic about sums it up.

Absolutely.

No offence to our Ford loving US brethren but what happened to the good old Aussie national trait of giving a bloke a fair go?

[DBourne]

I wasn't going to bother replying, but once again Gecko wins game, set, match.

Mate, no idea how you haven't become our PM yet

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Think of it in this scenario. Under the QLD Ambulance Services Act I have right of entry in to any premises, vehicle, building etc for the purpose of the conduct of my lawful duty. To gain entry I am legally allowed to force entry using destructive methods to part of the structure, vehicle etc (break a lock, smash a window etc). That is the law and that is without question, most states are the same. Imagine I am called to a property for a collapse of a person, whilst in pain they called 000 on a mobile (can not be traced to an address), but during the call they accidentally got their address wrong (it happens frequently). After giving the address they become unconscious and further attempts to call back are unsuccessful. I arrive and based on the information given I decide to force entry because I can not enter without doing so. On entry we find the house is empty and it is either a hoax call (it happens) or a wrong address. Should I then be charged for break and enter because it turned out the information was wrong and I did not have a duty to perform in that house? I should hope not, I acted in good faith based on the information I was given, not my fault. At the first moment I hear of a paramedic being charged in such a circumstance, I will then no longer ever force entry again, no one can ask me to perform what is potentially an illegal act and if they do I do not have to comply. Legally, I did not commit an offence and could not be charged, nor should I. In this situation the owner of the house would be compensated for the damage to the property by the service and security would be provided by the police and then the government builder until satisfactory repairs can be made. Is the owner of the house entitled to $1000's of compensation, no they are not and nor should they be.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

The point to my example is sometimes there are a combination of strange problems that lead to a genuine and well meaning mistake.

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I think a few people here need to get in touch with a bit of reality and realise that to make an error is to be human, no one is perfect.

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I think the owner of the car needs to grow up and think back to the many times they have made an honest mistake. Forgiveness is a quality that seems to be strangely lacking in todays society.

Well said, about sums it up.


Might be time for a

[Bobman]

Originally Posted by fiery

Just wonder what the story line and reaction of some of you people (plus family of the elderly man etc) would have been if it were in fact the other way round.. The girl had the wrong car????

How many elderly folks do you know? When they believe something in their head, they are adamant and even if they're 100% wrong, they still believe they are right. I guess it goes with that generation of stubbornness.

Also, geckoGT. With regards to the ambulance service. I believe that in Victoria, the police are required to attend to attempt break-in or even the fire brigade. If a paramedic decided to break-in to a house when the caller had their sim card removed, I would expect more than compensation if they broke in to my home without any proof that the caller was attached to that house & was obviously a hoax.

Moral of the story. Keys don't stop working for no reason.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Bobman

How many elderly folks do you know? When they believe something in their head, they are adamant and even if they're 100% wrong, they still believe they are right. I guess it goes with that generation of stubbornness.

Also, geckoGT. With regards to the ambulance service. I believe that in Victoria, the police are required to attend to attempt break-in or even the fire brigade. If a paramedic decided to break-in to a house when the caller had their sim card removed, I would expect more than compensation if they broke in to my home without any proof that the caller was attached to that house & was obviously a hoax.

Moral of the story. Keys don't stop working for no reason.

I am not sure about Vic, that is why I said most states and I can not be bothered with looking up Vic legislation because I really do not care.

In QLD, this is the legislation.

38 Powers of authorised officers
(1) An authorised officer, in providing ambulance services, may take any reasonable measures--

(a) to protect persons from any danger or potential danger associated with an emergency situation; and
(b) to protect persons trapped in a vehicle, receptacle, vessel or otherwise endangered; and
(c) to protect themselves or other officers or persons from danger, potential danger or assault from other persons.
(2) Without limiting the measures that may be taken for a purpose specified in subsection (1)(a) or (b), an authorised officer may, for that purpose--

(a) enter any premises, vehicle or vessel; and
(b) open any receptacle, using such force as is reasonably necessary; and
(c) bring any apparatus or equipment onto premises; and
(d) remove from or otherwise deal with, any article or material in the area; and
(e) destroy (wholly or partially) or damage any premises, vehicle, vessel or receptacle; and
(f) cause the gas or electricity supply or motor or any other source of energy to any premises, vehicle, vessel or receptacle to be shut off or disconnected; and
(g) request any person to take all reasonable measures to assist the authorised officer; and
(h) administer such basic life support and advanced life support procedures as are consistent with the training and qualifications of the authorised officer.
(3) Without limiting the measures that may be taken for a purpose specified in subsection (1)(c), an authorised officer may, for that purpose, require any person not to enter into or remain within a specified area around the site of the danger to a patient.

I am sure Vic has similar legislation. In Vic they may require the police, we do not and in fact in some circumstances we have greater right of entry. The fire service are not required by us unless we require their technical know how and equipment to effect a safe entry.

By the way, a mobile phone with or without SIM card does not prove suspected patient current location (yes they may reside somewhere else, but they may be inside the given address), that is why they are called mobile phones.

All we have to have is reasonable information to believe there is someone who requires urgent assistance. It is not a decision taken lightly and results in a huge incident report justifying our decision. Trust me, we exhaust all other options first (the ones we have time for depending on the nature of the call and the information given), we do not go around kicking doors down for fun (it is too much paperwork). I have forced entry about 6 times in 6 years, each resulted in a casualty found and one was pretty similar to the scenario I gave. Perhaps I should have gone your way and stayed outside, the lady would have died as she was severe asthma and required adrenaline to resuscitate her, if we were 5 minutes later she would have died (most likely).

By the way, I would love to know how you can tell it is "obviously a hoax", perhaps I need to learn from you.

Also, any mechanical device can fail, locks would be rare yes but not impossible. Perhaps the old boy is not very mechanically minded, not everyone is. Some cars do not even have an obvious mechanical key, you have to remove it from the remote. Remote fails, you do not know about the mechanical back up key and you have no way to get in.

You are judging the poor old boy based on the crap, biased information given by the reporter. I am sure RACV's story would be considerably different.

[Dave3911]

Originally Posted by Bobman

Also, geckoGT. With regards to the ambulance service. I believe that in Victoria, the police are required to attend to attempt break-in or even the fire brigade. If a paramedic decided to break-in to a house when the caller had their sim card removed, I would expect more than compensation if they broke in to my home without any proof that the caller was attached to that house & was obviously a hoax.

Ambos definitely can force entry in Victoria, don't need the police or fire brigade.

As for the 2nd half of your rant - you cant be serious. You don't have time to argue about "Proof" when someone may be in cardiac arrest or another serious medical problem...... If it was me lying on the floor unconscious, I'd hope someone didn't hesitate and kicked the damn door in.

Also, it is currently impossible to tell the difference between a "sim card removed call" and a "carrier roamed emergency call".... both give the same details to emergency services, which is why you will commonly hear these calls referred to as "default mobile" calls. Also, not all sim removed calls are dodgy. It is common practice all over the place for elderly people and young children to be given old phones by their family members to be used "in case of an emergency"..... saves paying a bill for a mobile when they dont need it for that purpose.

I also have no idea what more you'd want if they did break into your house on good faith? As long as the damaged is fixed, move on...... what more do you want!? It's a hell of a lot better than you'd get if it was actually a burglar who'd broken in and stole your TV..... Good luck getting a dime out of him when (or if!) they catch him.

[Jim Goose]

How many elderly folks do you know? When they believe something in their head, they are adamant and even if they're 100% wrong, they still believe they are right. I guess it goes with that generation of stubbornness.

Much like you...

Moral of the story. Keys don't stop working for no reason.

Flat battery can stop the key pad to work....
A worn out key can also cause make appear a lock doesnt work...


Oh yea bobman... while on the subject of old "geriatric" people.
One day I hope that when your 80yrs old and a bit senile and some young moron starts mouthing off at you because you had a seniors moment, I hope your able to remember this thread so you can reflect upon it and know exactly how it feels when the shoe is on the other foot and your on the receiving end...

This is by far the most pathetic excuse for a thread I have seen in a while on here.

[Quicksand]

Originally Posted by Bobman

Moral of the story. Keys don't stop working for no reason.

The keys dont, but the barrel does. Have you never had a key barrel that has failed? Even on a new car, anything is possible. Just look at the Kia's catching fire spontaneously at the moment.

I think people need a real dose of reality and context. Go spend a few weeks in societies that dont have anywhere near as many 'privileges' as we do and you will understand real pain and heartache.

Or spend a few nights with geckoGT.

[RG]

AFF - Where the only opinion that counts is yours and everyone else's needs to be argued against as they are WRONG!

[geckoGT]

Flat battery can stop the key pad to work....
A worn out key can also cause make appear a lock doesnt work...


Oh yea bobman... while on the subject of old "geriatric" people.
One day I hope that when your 80yrs old and a bit senile and some young moron starts mouthing off at you because you had a seniors moment, I hope your able to remember this thread so you can reflect upon it and know exactly how it feels when the shoe is on the other foot and your on the receiving end...

This is by far the most pathetic excuse for a thread I have seen in a while on here.

By the way, checked the 7pm report, it was a Holden Astra, about 2002 model so not unreasonable it may have some dodgy electrical connections or mechanical faults.

Ambos definitely can force entry in Victoria, don't need the police or fire brigade.

As for the 2nd half of your rant - you cant be serious. You don't have time to argue about "Proof" when someone may be in cardiac arrest or another serious medical problem...... If it was me lying on the floor unconscious, I'd hope someone didn't hesitate and kicked the damn door in.

Also, it is currently impossible to tell the difference between a "sim card removed call" and a "carrier roamed emergency call".... both give the same details to emergency services, which is why you will commonly hear these calls referred to as "default mobile" calls. Also, not all sim removed calls are dodgy. It is common practice all over the place for elderly people and young children to be given old phones by their family members to be used "in case of an emergency"..... saves paying a bill for a mobile when they dont need it for that purpose.

I also have no idea what more you'd want if they did break into your house on good faith? As long as the damaged is fixed, move on...... what more do you want!? It's a hell of a lot better than you'd get if it was actually a burglar who'd broken in and stole your TV..... Good luck getting a dime out of him when (or if!) they catch him.

Thank you very much. I am also sure 99.9999999% of the population would want forced entry on reasonable cause to suspect they were lying on the floor. By the way, we regularly get "default mobile calls", not unusual at all and the majority are not hoax.

Rep points coming to both of you as soon as I am allowed to dish some more out.

[fiery]

Originally Posted by Bobman

How many elderly folks do you know? When they believe something in their head, they are adamant and even if they're 100% wrong, they still believe they are right. I guess it goes with that generation of stubbornness.

Oh please, I know quite a lot of elderly and also younger people than myself that are in that same category you planted above. Age does not alter degree of someone being stubborn.

My point (which obviously went over your head) was that mistakes happen and people are not perfect. If it were a young person that was convinced the car was theirs would you be bagging them out so much?

Wasn't the 'damage' fixed? Wasn't the girl offered compensation (even if it wasn't much, it was more than some companies would offer for a mistake)?

My Aunt opened and sat in a man's car not so many years ago and freaked out when he asked what she was doing. She was adamant the car was hers. She was not old by any means when this happened.

Originally Posted by Bobman

Moral of the story. Keys don't stop working for no reason.

No, the moral of the story is mistakes happen, people need to remember compassion and forgiveness as geckogt stated.

oh and this theory keys don't stop working for no reason, would you like to explain that to Ford so I can have a new one without having the price tag to go along with it. They can not work out why the key and keypad died, for no apparent reason!!!

[cargenie]

everyone makes mistakes, it just seems like when a large company makes one the whole world is on it and milking it.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

The big problem I think is that the RACV up to not that long ago, used to supply a key tag for each members car, with the registration number on it.

The member had to show this tag to get RACV service.

Now the RACV dont issue these tags any more, probably for cost reasons. So the RACV service guy needs to check the registration with their centre each time. Seems to me the proof of registration with the person who called has therefore now become very unclear.

The registration should be on the system. A good reason why they ditched putting rego on the tags is when you lose or in some cases have your keys stolen, the unauthorised person who has them can find your car much easier. You can use your RACV member card as proof of membership etc.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by Bobman

How many elderly folks do you know? When they believe something in their head, they are adamant and even if they're 100% wrong, they still believe they are right. I guess it goes with that generation of stubbornness.

AFF must have a majority of membership above the age of 80.

This mistake is so horrendous that it's on the 7pm report?

Sure, it would be an inconvenience if it happened to me but I'd be satisfied with an apology and the damage repaired. What's sad is that society now considers this news worthy.

[Dave R]

I think alot of people are confusing a simple mistake with negligence. The whole "we all make mistakes" is being thrown around, but people forget that whoever gave the OK to tow it ignored protocol and didn't bother to check the rego (or realise that when a key doesn't even fit the door lock, something must be up). When you are dealing with something as serious as towing a car away then breaking into it, you shouldn't cut corners and that's obviously what's happened here. How else would they make such a blunder? It's not a mistake when they've blatantly ignored the correct procedure. If the rego check was done this would never have happened. Someone was negligent, didn't check rego, towed a car, broke into it, put a young woman through alot of stress.. and people are crying out for compassion? I can understand the simple mistakes that we all make. But I have no compassion for morons that don't follow the rules.

Also, nobody is calling for action against the moron. In fact it's a learning curve for the moron which will make him a better employee at the end of the day - I'm sure he will never cut corners again. I think the major reason why people are upset is because after they towed her car away, broke into it, went through her posessions and left the vehicle damaged, the RACV offered the woman a simple insurance policy upgrade that really costs them nothing. I would have expected them to give her the current insurance policy she holds for no charge for the next 12 months atleast.

Again I must emphasise, there is a massive difference between making a simple mistake and making a massive blunder due to negligence. I understand there are people here who won't feel the same way about this issue, but that's the beauty of this forum, at the end of the day nobody is right or wrong.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Rodp

This mistake is so horrendous that it's on the 7pm report?

But so was Justin Beiber's dummy spit..........

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Rodp

AFF must have a majority of membership above the age of 80.

This mistake is so horrendous that it's on the 7pm report?

Sure, it would be an inconvenience if it happened to me but I'd be satisfied with an apology and the damage repaired. What's sad is that society now considers this news worthy.

So true, three very good points.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

I think alot of people are confusing a simple mistake with negligence. The whole "we all make mistakes" is being thrown around, but people forget that whoever gave the OK to tow it ignored protocol and didn't bother to check the rego (or realise that when a key doesn't even fit the door lock, something must be up). When you are dealing with something as serious as towing a car away then breaking into it, you shouldn't cut corners and that's obviously what's happened here. How else would they make such a blunder? It's not a mistake when they've blatantly ignored the correct procedure. If the rego check was done this would never have happened. Someone was negligent, didn't check rego, towed a car, broke into it, put a young woman through alot of stress.. and people are crying out for compassion? I can understand the simple mistakes that we all make. But I have no compassion for morons that don't follow the rules.

Also, nobody is calling for action against the moron. In fact it's a learning curve for the moron which will make him a better employee at the end of the day - I'm sure he will never cut corners again. I think the major reason why people are upset is because after they towed her car away, broke into it, went through her posessions and left the vehicle damaged, the RACV offered the woman a simple insurance policy upgrade that really costs them nothing. I would have expected them to give her the current insurance policy she holds for no charge for the next 12 months atleast.

Again I must emphasise, there is a massive difference between making a simple mistake and making a massive blunder due to negligence. I understand there are people here who won't feel the same way about this issue, but that's the beauty of this forum, at the end of the day nobody is right or wrong.

Some good points there.

One thing we do not know is the rego status of his membership, had he transferred it to his new car?

A workshop mechanic realised the 81-year-old man had mistaken Ms Tomas's Holden Astra for his recently bought car.

Yes it was a new car to the old boy, it is not unbelievable that it may not have been transferred yet, but the owner still covered because he has gold membership. If that is the case, in the absence of the ability to do a police check(which they can't), RACV can not be held responsible. If that is the case, you can not really expect the RACV operator to stand there and refuse the service on the grounds that he believes it may not be the old boys car. The operator is probably a bit hesitant to ask questions that may make the client look silly, complaints often look worse than the events really were and you have to be really careful how you word things. I come across this regularly and sometimes you almost have to rehearse the question 20 times in your head to explore all conceivable responses so that you are sure the other person is not going to get upset. Those that work in an industry with frequent person contact will know what I mean. One thing we don't know is how many times the RACV operator has been verbally abused for asking innocent questions of people in a time of stress, perhaps he is tired of it and just takes their word on face value now. If that is the case, I could understand it, I sometimes feel like that too.

Just throwing it out there that there may be other circumstances involved that the biased and sensationalised report does not make clear. There are always two sides to a story and we have heard one.

I agree with you on the compensation idea if it was a negligent blunder, $100 off their policy is no great token of good will, it is a start but not really enough. A year free comprehensive insurance or insurance discount up to $1000 would be suitable. If it was not a result of negligence and RACV had no way of knowing the true owner, $100 is probably more than enough.

Personally I think many here have jumped to conclusions based on 50% of the information and are prepared to execute both RACV and the old boy for the incident. Perhaps there were a number of factors that added together to make this a simple accident. I am not saying I 100% believe RACV is not at fault and were not negligent. I am just saying that I do not know enough to get out there and start constructing the gallows yet, none of us do.

[JamesR]

do people not read?

if you were to have Total Care, you can get RACV assistance on ANY car you are in a passenger in.

so therefore, what would a "simple rego check" do? it wouldn't mean a thing.

Originally Posted by Rodp

This mistake is so horrendous that it's on the 7pm report?

it couldnt have been that bad, didnt see it on ACA or TT.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by JamesR

do people not read?

if you were to have Total Care, you can get RACV assistance on ANY car you are in a passenger in.

so therefore, what would a "simple rego check" do? it wouldn't mean a thing.

.

Obviously they don't, that was mentioned ages ago and they are still on about a rego check against the membership.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by JamesR

it couldnt have been that bad, didnt see it on ACA or TT.

They obviously didn't get the exclusive of this world shattering event.

..............

Seriously how many cars do RACV attend to and tow. Yet this one mistake has brought about the end of the world. I'd say their record is pretty good. Unfortunately it was an inconvenience to the young lady and she should be compensated (if damage was done that it should be repaired, maybe free gold cover ). Then everyone should build a bridge and get on with their lives. Personally I'd rather see this rare mistake then someone in genuine need be left stranded because their rego didn't match the car.

But I guess I believe their is more important things in this world to be concerned with.

[302 XC]

Why are people goin on about rego checks,ID checks blah blah blah
Its been said,and its TRUE
Some memberships cover the driver in ANY car

On the ambo issue
What gets me, when ambos are trying to get threw traffic and people dont get out of there road
These are the first people to scream issues when the ambos dont get there quick enuf
I respect ANY person who has to deal with injury/injuries life/death issues on a daily occurance

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

On the ambo issue
What gets me, when ambos are trying to get threw traffic and people dont get out of there road
These are the first people to scream issues when the ambos dont get there quick enuf
I respect ANY person who has to deal with injury/injuries life/death issues on a daily occurance

Appreciated, thank you from us all. Lets not get started on getting through traffic under lights and sirens issue, its been the death of a few threads now.

Although I strongly believe this thread has gone around in enough circles to close now, before we loop back around again and end up our own backside.

[Giant Cranium]

i say gecko gt for moderator

[BENT_8]

The gent claims to have recently bought a new car, Astras were dis continued 14months ago, the RACV are tools!

I notice they dont mention the type of car the old guy has...

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Absolutely, I am 38 and have jumped into the wrong ambulance at hospital many times, I must be demented.

Anyway, I am off to the local cop shop to hand in my license.

Wouldn't be hard, the only difference between Vic Ambo's is the number of the car.

I can't count how many times when I was little and I started following or grabbed the wrong persons hand thinking it was Mum haha.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

The gent claims to have recently bought a new car, Astras were dis continued 14months ago, the RACV are tools!

I notice they dont mention the type of car the old guy has...

A workshop mechanic realised the 81-year-old man had mistaken Ms Tomas's Holden Astra for his recently bought car.

It does not say his new car, it says his recently purchased car, people can buy a new second-hand car.
I am tipping it was a silver 2002ish astra like the girl's.

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Although I strongly believe this thread has gone around in enough circles to close now, before we loop back around again and end up our own backside.

Couldn't have put it any better myself. How it's lasted this long is beyond me.