So... What do you guys think of this story in the Daily Mail? Does it make you angry?

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

The fact is, that if they won a civil case to have the caravan returned (which they probably wouldn't) it would be mysteriously trashed before it could be returned.

 

[kevo]

The story might be. The point is the facts and account of what actually happened will differ wildly because as a paper, it doesn't checks facts, uses half-truths, lies and ignores responses that don't fit in with its story. It's not a right or left-wing thing, it's the standard of paper and the Mail is the worst

This. It is the worst paper by far for having an agenda. Anyone who thinks what they read in it resembles the truth is an utter moron.

 

[somerset]

It's an awful story but ultimately that is the whole POINT of insurance. Either that £30,000 caravan was important to them or it wasn't. If it was, then they should have insured it. If you can afford a caravan at that price, you can afford to insure it.

I still hate pikies though, obviously.

However the story is presented, the questions I ask you is , Was the caravan stolen? Do you you think the lack of insurance lessens the crime?......just wondering!.

 

[Bold Seagull]

The Daily Mail makes me angry, end of story.

 

[somerset]

This. It is the worst paper by far for having an agenda. Anyone who thinks what they read in it resembles the truth is an utter moron.

Only if that agenda doesn't align itself with your political and social views......

I don't buy or read it, but its popular enough to touch the interest of quite a few million individuals around this country.

 

[happypig]

It makes me THIS angry :

 

[somerset]

The Daily Mail makes me angry, end of story.

Don't fookin read it then.

 

[soistes]

The Daily Mail makes me angry, end of story.

I never get to the end of the story once I realise it's from the Mail

 

[BBassic]

The trouble I find with the Mail is that I can happily ignore it and not read it but unfortunately people I talk to on a daily basis do read it and use it to form the basis of their opinions on many things and am thus still impacted by its awful drivel.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Don't fookin read it then.

I don't.

 

[Simster]

Surely the question of insurance is irrelevant. If it was stolen then it should be returned in the same way a car would be. The whole justice system appears scared of the traveller community.

That's because they are. I once hired a chap with a digger. When I asked him why he was padlocking it down even though he was coming in back inside my house for just a ten min cup of tea before he left, he told me the story of how he had once left a digger on the back of a pick up when someone lifted it off with a crane lorry and made off with it. The police were informed and the tracking device led them to a PIKEY settlement and they were too shit scared to go in there and get it back off them.

However the story is presented, the questions I ask you is , Was the caravan stolen? Do you you think the lack of insurance lessens the crime?......just wondering!.

Of course it was stolen and of course the lack of insurance doesn't lessen the crime. But getting insurance is no brainer and an absolute basic. You'd have to be a complete muppet not to insure your property if it is worth £30,000. I bet NOBODY who has read this thread has anything worth £30,000+ uninsured.

The Daily Mail will have licked its lips when they found these people - too stupid/naive not to have insured their property, thereby amplifying the undeniable sense of injustice.

 

[midnight_rendezvous]

Daily Mail hates travellers. What's next? They hate anyone vaguely brown or gay?

 

[The Stout Yeoman]

Then they are also stupid and is it even legal to take a caravan on the road without insurance?

Where does it say that they did ? Perhaps they let it lapse inbetween holidays?

 

[1901]

This is a classic Daily Mail story.
Like the Express with House Prices and Diana.

 

[somerset]

Of course it was stolen and of course the lack of insurance doesn't lessen the crime.
.

Good, glad you agree with most sane people on this site.... carry on.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Some very strange views on this thread.

People abusing others for not disbelieving a story because it's in the daily mail. Is that not exactly the same as believing every story in the daily mail? I'm pretty sure it is, which makes every one of you equally as thick, well done

Obviously I'm using my brain to ignore the sensationalism and the bullsh*t, but when you look at the facts - they had their property stolen and the police have no power to retrieve it for them - it is still ridiculous situation, regardless of which newspaper reported it. They've obviously made a costly mistake in not getting it insured, I guess they thought it would be safe in lockup.

 

[Icy Gull]

Where does it say that they did ? Perhaps they let it lapse inbetween holidays?

I find it hard to believe that they hadn't received an insurance renewal notice or that they could be that stupid to just let the insurance lapse because they weren't taking it out on the road. Do people really let insurances lapse on things that are worth 30k?

I also find the police attitude to all this unbelievable too.

Does it make me angry? Nope.

 

[Husty]

One of these days The Mail is going to make a very valid, reasoned point on something or other and I'm not going to pay it any attention because every other article they've ever written has been made up hyperbole. Unfortunate.

 

[drew]

Very clever of the Mail to just throw in a one liner about the insurance just to absolve the couple. Insurance would have lessened the crime, that's what it is for. Had they not let the policy lapse, and let's be honest, they would have received renewal notices, then their insurers would have paid for either a replacement or, more likely, market value. Talking of market value, the Mail bang on about a £30,000 caravan when in fact it was worth considerably less! Quick look at Auto Trader shows a four berth four year old caravan is in the region of £10k. Not quite such a big impact as saying it is £30k.

And why would insurance lessen the crime? Because the couple would have had a pay out and could have bought a second hand caravan and continued with their holidays. The ownership problem would have transferred to the insurance company (and of course it would be unlikely that the mail would then have the human interest story!).

They are victims of a crime but they are also stupid victims. I have little sympathy. Compares with people who get hurt abroad but didn't have any insurance and then expect us to club together to pay for them to come home.

 

[somerset]

Very clever of the Mail to just throw in a one liner about the insurance just to absolve the couple. Insurance would have lessened the crime, that's what it is for. Had they not let the policy lapse, and let's be honest, they would have received renewal notices, then their insurers would have paid for either a replacement or, more likely, market value. Talking of market value, the Mail bang on about a £30,000 caravan when in fact it was worth considerably less! Quick look at Auto Trader shows a four berth four year old caravan is in the region of £10k. Not quite such a big impact as saying it is £30k.

And why would insurance lessen the crime? Because the couple would have had a pay out and could have bought a second hand caravan and continued with their holidays. The ownership problem would have transferred to the insurance company (and of course it would be unlikely that the mail would then have the human interest story!).

They are victims of a crime but they are also stupid victims. I have little sympathy. Compares with people who get hurt abroad but didn't have any insurance and then expect us to club together to pay for them to come home.

I am sorry......but blaming the victims is just the ravings of an arssehoole......you really need to think a bit before you spout your craap.......a crime is a crime.....don't even try to dilute that.....