Stolen 90's back!!!

Well she finally came home yesterday and has cost my insurance Co well over
£1,300.
Here's my log of events.....

Stolen 19th Dec 2005. (Sunday night/Monday morning) reported to Surrey
Police, no-one asked for details of contents or cost despite me saying it's
a van with tools in back. Insurance Co ask me to send V5, Keys, Service
history, purchase receipt and driving license to their Total Loss dept. ???.
Said I would do that after Christmas due to post etc.



24/12. Christmas Eve. 20.00.hrs. message from Thames Valley Police. Found
in Slough. Taken to pound. Nothing can be done 'till after Christmas but
pound says there is stuff, tools, in the back when I phoned.

28th Dec. Phoned Ins Co to advise found as they were going to write off,
advise them some tools still in back.

29th Dec. SOCO says damage to electrics and steering lock but tools are
there and backs still locked.

At ....**pound**........ their recovery/storage costs so far are £285 + VAT.

Later.arranged that Insurance will collect and repair.. by

**** a garage in Twickenham****

3rd Jan.Tue. Phoned garage, didn't seem to know if my 90 was there or not.
Said we could collect tools later, will phone us, and should be booked in
tomorrow for repair but wasn't sure about the damage and didn't seem to
realise it was a stolen vehicle repair.

Phoned them again later, still actually at Pound in Iver, won't collect till
Thursday 5th now. !!!

Later, went to Pound and collected most of the tools etc which are all
there. Guard said Ins arranged today that they (***** Recovery) are to take
the 90 to the garage tomorrow, the 4th.

6th Jan. Fri. Garage phoned, need a full Lock set, that's all, electrics OK,
should be ready next Thursday as have to wait for parts.

12th Jan.Thur. Phoned again, will phone back. Phoned again late pm, Lock set
just arrived, will be ready tomorrow now. They will phone me.

13th Jan. Fri. They phoned am asked for keys so they can unlock other
doors/petrol cap to change locks, we delivered keys to them. Can't get it
started. Phoned them again pm, needs a new starter motor. Ready Monday.

16th Jan. Mon. Phoned them 15.50. Just completed, told them we will collect
tomorrow morning now.

17th Jan. Collected vehicle, strange "new" sounding starter motor.



First comment, I (my Ins Co) have to pay for recovery and storage of my
stolen vehicle...that's a disgrace, would the same occur if anything else
was stolen, a painting maybe? Am I not the innocent party? Another case of
fleece the motorist.



Secondly the first thing the SOCO said to me was "at least your tyre depth
is OK" ...errr..... wrong priorities maybe? And shouldn't she or another
Officer have asked for a list of items that should be in the back? No-one
ever did and replacement cost of everything in the vehicle was over £1200.



So I'm out £100 excess and loss of no claims bonus plus all the agro of not
having the vehicle for a month, just 'cause some b'tard wanted a drive home.
Oh, and I found out today the Radio doesn't work.


--
Regards
Bob

"Mr. ****ed Off of Runnymede."

Bob Hobden wrote:

> First comment, I (my Ins Co) have to pay for recovery and storage of my
> stolen vehicle...that's a disgrace, would the same occur if anything else
> was stolen, a painting maybe? Am I not the innocent party? Another case of
> fleece the motorist.

That reminds me of case a few years ago when a car was found abandoned
(but drivable) having been stolen. Owner agreed that police could take
it away for forensic tests. Attempts were then made to charge the owner
the standard recovery rate (£100 plus) for transporting the car around
whilst the police did their thing.

Is it any wonder that we get miffed?

"Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> First comment, I (my Ins Co) have to pay for recovery and storage of my
> stolen vehicle...that's a disgrace, would the same occur if anything else
> was stolen, a painting maybe? Am I not the innocent party? Another case of
> fleece the motorist.

There are stated cases re appeals over this, the courts found in favour of
the police. The vehicle being recovered on behalf of the owner.

> Secondly the first thing the SOCO said to me was "at least your tyre depth
> is OK" ...errr..... wrong priorities maybe? And shouldn't she or another
> Officer have asked for a list of items that should be in the back? No-one
> ever did and replacement cost of everything in the vehicle was over £1200.

I don't know the manner in which the ocnversation went, do you have chunky
tyres? Even if not bog standard Landy tyre tread is Big in comparison to
your common garden Corsa's. I wonder if it was an attempt at some light
hearted humour to make light of a bad situation? I could be wrong but seems
otherwise to be a pointless comment to make in which case I see your
frustration.

Most details of stolen vehicles are passed over the phone in my force. I
would say unless you specifically list stuff in that conversation then it's
not going to be initially recorded. I'm not suggesting thats "right" but say
for instance my car was nicked, I'd have a hard job remembering what CD's
are in there, whats in the door pockets, unique identifiable items etc etc.
I probably notice them missing 3 months later.

This does present problems for bobbies, I've stopped a youf with a engraved
zippo in his pocket prior to dealing an hour later with a theft from vehicle
where I had to ask , "Has a lighter been taken?" "Yes" , "Can you describe
it to me"... Bingo. Fortunately I filled in my stop search form so chummy
was promptly nicked.

Bob you have my sympathy but take some time out and chill dude, life is just
too short. Landy is back, tools are back, Insurance is par for the course...
biggest bunch of crooks since the crooks themselves. If the police paid for
every vehicle recovered then where do you think the money for that would
come from? Alternative is they leave them at the road side which has ended
up with the police having to explain "duty of care" issues when the car gets
used to kill someone later. Dammed if they do, dammed if they don't.
Recovery companies don't recover for charity.

Lee

"Lee_D" wrote after
>
> "Bob Hobden" ranted
..
>
>> Secondly the first thing the SOCO said to me was "at least your tyre
>> depth is OK" ...errr..... wrong priorities maybe? And shouldn't she or
>> another Officer have asked for a list of items that should be in the
>> back? No-one ever did and replacement cost of everything in the vehicle
>> was over £1200.
>
> I don't know the manner in which the ocnversation went, do you have chunky
> tyres? Even if not bog standard Landy tyre tread is Big in comparison to
> your common garden Corsa's. I wonder if it was an attempt at some light
> hearted humour to make light of a bad situation? I could be wrong but
> seems otherwise to be a pointless comment to make in which case I see your
> frustration.

No, I didn't get the idea it was humour, she was too "professional".
>
> Most details of stolen vehicles are passed over the phone in my force. I
> would say unless you specifically list stuff in that conversation then
> it's not going to be initially recorded. I'm not suggesting thats "right"
> but say for instance my car was nicked, I'd have a hard job remembering
> what CD's are in there, whats in the door pockets, unique identifiable
> items etc etc. I probably notice them missing 3 months later.
>
> This does present problems for bobbies, I've stopped a youf with a
> engraved zippo in his pocket prior to dealing an hour later with a theft
> from vehicle where I had to ask , "Has a lighter been taken?" "Yes" , "Can
> you describe it to me"... Bingo. Fortunately I filled in my stop search
> form so chummy was promptly nicked.
>
> Bob you have my sympathy but take some time out and chill dude, life is
> just too short. Landy is back, tools are back, Insurance is par for the
> course... biggest bunch of crooks since the crooks themselves. If the
> police paid for every vehicle recovered then where do you think the money
> for that would come from? Alternative is they leave them at the road side
> which has ended up with the police having to explain "duty of care" issues
> when the car gets used to kill someone later. Dammed if they do, dammed if
> they don't. Recovery companies don't recover for charity.
>
Point take
--
Regards
Bob
1974 S111 SWB 2.25 petrol Hardtop (For Sale)
1987 90 2.5 petrol Hardtopn.

"Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> First comment, I (my Ins Co) have to pay for recovery and storage of my
>> stolen vehicle...that's a disgrace, would the same occur if anything else
>> was stolen, a painting maybe? Am I not the innocent party? Another case
>> of fleece the motorist.
>
> There are stated cases re appeals over this, the courts found in favour of
> the police. The vehicle being recovered on behalf of the owner.
>
>> Secondly the first thing the SOCO said to me was "at least your tyre
>> depth is OK" ...errr..... wrong priorities maybe? And shouldn't she or
>> another Officer have asked for a list of items that should be in the
>> back? No-one ever did and replacement cost of everything in the vehicle
>> was over £1200.
>
> I don't know the manner in which the ocnversation went, do you have chunky
> tyres? Even if not bog standard Landy tyre tread is Big in comparison to
> your common garden Corsa's. I wonder if it was an attempt at some light
> hearted humour to make light of a bad situation? I could be wrong but
> seems otherwise to be a pointless comment to make in which case I see your
> frustration.
>
> Most details of stolen vehicles are passed over the phone in my force. I
> would say unless you specifically list stuff in that conversation then
> it's not going to be initially recorded. I'm not suggesting thats "right"
> but say for instance my car was nicked, I'd have a hard job remembering
> what CD's are in there, whats in the door pockets, unique identifiable
> items etc etc. I probably notice them missing 3 months later.
>
> This does present problems for bobbies, I've stopped a youf with a
> engraved zippo in his pocket prior to dealing an hour later with a theft
> from vehicle where I had to ask , "Has a lighter been taken?" "Yes" , "Can
> you describe it to me"... Bingo. Fortunately I filled in my stop search
> form so chummy was promptly nicked.
>
> Bob you have my sympathy but take some time out and chill dude, life is
> just too short. Landy is back, tools are back, Insurance is par for the
> course... biggest bunch of crooks since the crooks themselves. If the
> police paid for every vehicle recovered then where do you think the money
> for that would come from? Alternative is they leave them at the road side
> which has ended up with the police having to explain "duty of care" issues
> when the car gets used to kill someone later. Dammed if they do, dammed if
> they don't. Recovery companies don't recover for charity.
>
> Lee

Bob, glad to hear you got it back.

Lee, I can sympathise with the bad press that some coppers get for
effectively "just doing their job", and believe you me it's reassuring to
hear that there are some out there that actually take policing seriously.
However, here's a little tale for you. When my wife's car was hit on a
single-track road by a total knob in a ****roen xantia (his ABS was
inoperative, he left a skid mark from his NSF 4.5 times the length of his
car on dry tarmac, and the same NSF tyre was under the legal tread limit all
the way round. My wife was stationary at the point of impact! ) the coppers
that turned up just couldn't have cared less, it was going to be
knock-for-knock simply because it was a single track road, nothing to do
with who was driving at what speed, christ, the little **** even admitted to
them that he had been going too fast to stop! They didn't measure the skid
or anything, they failed to check his car properly and if it hadn't been for
me going armed with camera I doubt we'd have been able to fight the insurers
and win!! Now, I always thought the job of the attending officers was to
gather all the evidence and report back, not to make the Procurator Fiscal's
decision whether there would be a prosecution or not on the spot. (Scottish
law, the PF decides whether a case goes to court or not) When the insurers
contacted the police they couldn't even find a record of the 999 callout, it
was only my wife pushing it with an itemised mobile phone bill that proved
she'd made the 999 call that got any action from the coppers, and even then
it took 6 weeks to get a statement from the attending officers!! Now, it's
not even as though they've a lot to do, it was just after teatime on a calm
sunny spring evening, a Tuesday, in an area where the loss of a cat up a
tree is breaking news!
I used to respect our village bobby when I was a kid, but it's a sad thing
when I have to grit my teeth and force myself to explain to my 6 year old
daughter why the police are good people and to be respected, 'cos I'm afraid
my adult dealings with them (all as a law abiding citizen, I hasten to add)
have almost always left a bitter aftertaste......
We won eventually, but only by threatening legal action against both the
very people who are supposed to be upholding the law; and the insurers.

Badger.

"Badger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

<snip>

> We won eventually, but only by threatening legal action against both the
> very people who are supposed to be upholding the law; and the insurers.
>
> Badger.

You did get ****e service there and are right to be bitter.

Lee.

Lee_D wrote:
>If the police paid for
> every vehicle

....and who pays for the police ? It should be part of the service. Its
like charging us extra to turn up at a robbery isn't it ?

Steve

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:56:09 +0000, Steve Taylor
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>If the police paid for every vehicle
>
>...and who pays for the police ? It should be part of the service. Its
>like charging us extra to turn up at a robbery isn't it ?

Not at all. If "we" who pay for the police had to pay for
_everything_ that the police do, we'd be paying somewhere in the
region of 8 times as much - covering the recovery of private vehicles,
paying for high level police presence at football matches, on a
weekend in every city centre, at rallies and demonstrations, rock
concerts...

The simple economics is that the police are constantly expected to do
more, with less staff and reducing budgets.

Now if you _really_ want to get scared you only need to look at some
of the 'think tank' theories about the policie charging to investigate
petty crime so that they have greater resources to fight serious crime
- like terrorism and not having a TV licence... Erm...


--
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one
of distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being
increasingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs
In memory of Brian {Hamilton Kelly} who logged off 15th September 2005

"Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Badger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> <snip>
>
>> We won eventually, but only by threatening legal action against both the
>> very people who are supposed to be upholding the law; and the insurers.
>>
>> Badger.
>
> You did get ****e service there and are right to be bitter.
>
> Lee.

Cheers mate, but I do sometimes feel bad within myself at holding a general
"bitterness grudge", as I was brought up in an environment where you had
respect for the local bobby 'cos you knew that he (predominantly male back
then) would actually uphold the law.
Our local bobby was ace, he'd wander along the lane from the police house to
the old coal bings where we used to run around on old motorbikes as kids and
check our brakes all worked etc, but we all knew fine well what he really
wanted... a shot himself! LOL! But, if you did something wrong, you'd live
in fear of him catching you as he could administer a right good clip around
the lug or kick up the ar5e. Maybe that's where it's all gone wrong, the
ability to administer an instant "physical" conviction has been taken away
by do-gooders and litigation, for the worse, I feel.
It's just a pity that the good guys get tarred with the same brush as the
bad ones.
Badger.

"Mother" <"@ {mother} @"@101fc.net> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:56:09 +0000, Steve Taylor
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>If the police paid for every vehicle
>>
>>...and who pays for the police ? It should be part of the service. Its
>>like charging us extra to turn up at a robbery isn't it ?
>
> Not at all. If "we" who pay for the police had to pay for
> _everything_ that the police do, we'd be paying somewhere in the
> region of 8 times as much - covering the recovery of private vehicles,
> paying for high level police presence at football matches, on a
> weekend in every city centre, at rallies and demonstrations, rock
> concerts...

And boy, can they charge for concerts! Mate of mine organised a big rock
concert up this way last year and had it not been for a friendly ex-police
inspector explaining the rules re. numbers of police v's type of fencing and
no's of private security persons, it'd have bankrupted the whole
proceedings.

> The simple economics is that the police are constantly expected to do
> more, with less staff and reducing budgets.

But if we told all the bloody do-gooders (and europe) to sod off and
reverted to traditional values (clout around the lug / kick up the ar5e etc)
and got rid of all the overly complex paperwork (not to mention expensive
and unreliable computer systems) them maybe they'd have enough people to
actually have a beat bobby presence again, which in itself is a damn good
deterrent to petty crime.
Big issue is the budget holders on high, if they'd see a new database
system, for example, as a tool to aid the capture of criminals rather than
just an excuse to save on wages then that would make a big difference I
think.

> Now if you _really_ want to get scared you only need to look at some
> of the 'think tank' theories about the policie charging to investigate
> petty crime so that they have greater resources to fight serious crime
> - like terrorism and not having a TV licence... Erm...

Now that's scary!
Badger.

"Steve Taylor" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Lee_D wrote:
>>If the police paid for every vehicle
>
> ...and who pays for the police ? It should be part of the service. Its
> like charging us extra to turn up at a robbery isn't it ?
>
> Steve

I think I made that point a bit further down but yes your right Steve, The
Police Officers aren't the only ones funding the Police Service via council
tax and income tax but so do the rest of the public (well at least those in
gainful employment). I love the "I pay your wages..." routine, always makes
me chuckle as I pay my wages too ... and want my monies worth, my street is
self policing... I should be sending a bill somewhere.



Lee

"Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...


> my street is self policing... I should be sending a bill somewhere.
>
>

Good point, well presented. Try your euro-mp, he (or she) must be good for
something? ;-)

Badger.

Mother" <"@ {mother} @ wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:56:09 +0000, Steve Taylor
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> If the police paid for every vehicle
>>
>> ...and who pays for the police ? It should be part of the service.
>> Its like charging us extra to turn up at a robbery isn't it ?
>
> Not at all. If "we" who pay for the police had to pay for
> _everything_ that the police do, we'd be paying somewhere in the
> region of 8 times as much - covering the recovery of private vehicles,
> paying for high level police presence at football matches, on a
> weekend in every city centre, at rallies and demonstrations, rock
> concerts...
>
> The simple economics is that the police are constantly expected to do
> more, with less staff and reducing budgets.
>
> Now if you _really_ want to get scared you only need to look at some
> of the 'think tank' theories about the policie charging to investigate
> petty crime so that they have greater resources to fight serious crime
> - like terrorism and not having a TV licence... Erm...

Eh?
I see, you're saying the constabulary has some other source of income than what
the exchequer pay. Interesting, tell us what it might be?

--
"He who says it cannot be done is advised not to interrupt her doing
it."

If at first you don't succeed,
maybe skydiving's not for you!

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:25:05 +0000 (UTC), Badger wrote:

> And boy, can they charge for concerts! Mate of mine organised a big
> rock concert up this way last year and had it not been for a
> friendly ex-police inspector explaining the rules re. numbers of
> police v's type of fencing and no's of private security persons,
> it'd have bankrupted the whole proceedings.

That would be to have the Police on "private" property, yes? Football
clubs pay for any Police *in* the ground but not for those outside the
ground. This is why you see lots of private security people in grounds
and not many Police Officers, just enough to make the arrests and bang
'em into the holding tank. The hundred or so Officers outside with the
drunken football "supporters" are paid for by us.

> But if we told all the bloody do-gooders (and europe) to sod off and
> reverted to traditional values (clout around the lug / kick up the
> ar5e etc)

Aye, it is frightening when you hear of some 7 year old kid who has
just kicked seven shades of **** out of another child answering back
"You can't touch me, I know my rights". I'd be for six of the best,
though with a gym shoe not the cane. It still hurts enough to impart
the message.

Trouble is you once societies gone soft it's very difficult to go back
to stricter times.

--
Cheers [email protected]
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:54:46 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Trouble is you once societies gone soft it's very difficult to go back
>to stricter times.

I don't follow the 'we must get stricter' arguments I hear each and
every week. I think there's something more fundamental, something to
do with values and standards. You can have a soft and secure society.


--
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one
of distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being
increasingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs
In memory of Brian {Hamilton Kelly} who logged off 15th September 2005

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:24:03 GMT, "GbH" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I see, you're saying the constabulary has some other source of income than what
>the exchequer pay. Interesting, tell us what it might be?

I thought I just did.

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:43:14 -0000, "Lee_D"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>my street is
>self policing... I should be sending a bill somewhere.

There is a very strong argument that gated communities who employ
their own security should be given rebates. This is NOT my argument,
by the way.

Mother <"@ {mother} @"@101fc.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:43:14 -0000, "Lee_D"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> my street is
>> self policing... I should be sending a bill somewhere.
>
> There is a very strong argument that gated communities who employ
> their own security should be given rebates.

Aye and folk without children too.

> This is NOT my argument,
> by the way.

indeed.
--
William Tasso

William Tasso <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz funny
about:
> Mother <"@ {mother} @"@101fc.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:43:14 -0000, "Lee_D"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> my street is
>>> self policing... I should be sending a bill somewhere.
>>
>> There is a very strong argument that gated communities who employ
>> their own security should be given rebates.
>
> Aye and folk without children too.
>
>> This is NOT my argument,
>> by the way.
>
> indeed.

Thats odd...news.individual didn't show Martyns post...least not here
anyway. Hope this isn't a new trend :-(

Lee

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:45:43 +0000, Mother <"@ {mother} @"@101fc.net>
scribbled the following nonsense:

>On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 15:54:46 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Trouble is you once societies gone soft it's very difficult to go back
>>to stricter times.
>
>I don't follow the 'we must get stricter' arguments I hear each and
>every week. I think there's something more fundamental, something to
>do with values and standards. You can have a soft and secure society.

yep, currently all our staff are involved in rolling out a
"traditional values" programme at school to the kids. Some of them
are real sh*t bags, and one young lady reduced one the science
teachers to tears this week, just by refusing to work and verbally
abuseing her.....

Some of the problem now is that kids are bringing up kids.... At a
year 7 parents evening I sat talking to some one I went to school with
about their 11 year old daughter, and i'm not yet 29.....
--

Simon Isaacs

Peterborough 4x4 Club Newsletter Editor and Webmaster
Green Lane Association (GLASS) Financial Director
101 Ambi, undergoing camper conversion www.simoni.co.uk
1976 S3 LWT, Fully restored, ready for sale! Make me an offer!
Suzuki SJ410 (Wife's) 3" lift kit fitted, body shell now restored and mounted on chassis, waiting on a windscreen and MOT
Series 3 88" Rolling chassis...what to do next
1993 200 TDi Discovery
1994 200 TDi Discovery body sheel, being bobbed and modded.....