If you post a review on Google reviews that can’t be removed by the company
Just sayin
I think your wrong Andrejs.
What’s is apparent is that MOST companies have a plan, should this happen.
It’s an obvious possibility on international work and one that Matthews have either
1 - completely neglected to look at - which shows a ■■■■ poor ability to run a well thought out operation.
2 - have scrimped in having the bare minimum insurance. Which again isn’t the best advert for customers or staff. What else do they shave expenses off?
At the end of the day - it’s a drop in the ocean to Matthews (look at the account). Jesus if it’s that hard - sell a bloody reefer. This is the most public ■■■■ up by a transport firm I can recall and all it takes is a split second to lose reputation. And they have. All of it.
They seem to be hated, not just by us but by the general public. They are probably the second most famous haulier in the UK now for all the wrong reasons.
To put it in perspective - most companies have one or two Google or yell.com reviews. Matthews have about 60 on each ATM and rising.
I’d say some interesting conversations may be occurring with customers either now or shortly as this has gotten quite big, quite quickly.
Threats to sabotage fridges have been mentioned in other sites - if I was a certain pharmaceutical customer of theirs - would I risk my cargo?
senior50:
If you post a review on Google reviews that can’t be removed by the company
Just sayin
Got that, thanks. 
The really annoying part of this is that the insurance is so cheap it’s not worth the hassle to not have it. A simple thing like a driver twisting his ankle or a major dose of the squirts can require another driver being sent out to retrieve the lorry, which apart from being a complete ball ache, can also get very expensive. Getting a driver to another country to continue a trip and taking the injured/sick driver along for the ride would cover the premiums for a couple of years for a reasonably sized fleet. It’s madness not to have it.
In this case the company have acted disgracefully, there is no justification for their actions whatsoever. As Harry said, the cost is irrelevant, you would have to do whatever you had to do to get the man back home to his family so they could give him a proper burial.
Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
kjw21:
I think your wrong Andrejs.What’s is apparent is that MOST companies have a plan, should this happen.
It’s an obvious possibility on international work and one that Matthews have either
1 - completely neglected to look at - which shows a ■■■■ poor ability to run a well thought out operation.
2 - have scrimped in having the bare minimum insurance. Which again isn’t the best advert for customers or staff. What else do they shave expenses off?
At the end of the day - it’s a drop in the ocean to Matthews (look at the account). Jesus if it’s that hard - sell a bloody reefer. This is the most public ■■■■ up by a transport firm I can recall and all it takes is a split second to lose reputation. And they have. All of it.
They seem to be hated, not just by us but by the general public. They are probably the second most famous haulier in the UK now for all the wrong reasons.
To put it in perspective - most companies have one or two Google or yell.com reviews. Matthews have about 60 on each ATM and rising.
I’d say some interesting conversations may be occurring with customers either now or shortly as this has gotten quite big, quite quickly.
Threats to sabotage fridges have been mentioned in other sites - if I was a certain pharmaceutical customer of theirs - would I risk my cargo?
This not just this company fault can be.Really most people who go abroad by working reason -not insured there .I think must some goverment rulles and requarement for people or companies if they go abroad.But Union must try found this potentional situation before .
£10 from me too more than happy to, £15,505 raised in 3 days
Hope it ruins the company tbh serves em right if it does disgusting behaviour
Andrejs:
This not just this company fault can be.Really most people who go abroad by working reason -not insured there .I think must some goverment rulles and requarement for people or companies if they go abroad.But Union must try found this potentional situation before .
There was a time Andrejs when such a post as this would never have appeared on TruckNet, but unfortunately since the 2004 and 2007 eu expansions, working conditions as well as wages have sharply deteriorated for UK truck drivers.
Rikki-UK:
Just a note chaps, I know emotions are running high, and on some facebook groups/pages some are offering threats to the staff and company, Please do not post such threats on here or they will be removed.For what its worth I personally think the company has acted shamefully on the facts presented and have made a contribution to bring this driver home
Although CM may be hesitant to write a negative article about Matthews - Would it be worth running an article about working abroad and insurances and repatriation. Maybe some high level exposure may make other companies take a detailed look at their own arrangements should this happen again.
Maybe using your media influence you can stop this happening to another family in the future.
m1cks:
CM may be hesitant to write a negative article about Matthews
Understatement of the year
Just seen the story on itv news.
Sounds really fishy from Matthews as the news reader said they discovered that the driver had deceased because the tracker indicated that the truck hadn’t moved for several hours. Yet I thought they can’t pay out because he was on a break. Why would they be expecting it to move if he really was on break?
I hope this whole thing ruins Matthews and any driver with any morales walks out on them.
Harry Monk:
m1cks:
CM may be hesitant to write a negative article about MatthewsUnderstatement of the year
CM are aware of the incident, and like any media outlet would write the facts as known about the situation -its not for CM to pass judgement but to tell the story and leave the reader to draw their on conclusions
Daytrunker:
Hope it ruins the company tbh serves em right if it does disgusting behaviour
+1
Rikki-UK:
Harry Monk:
m1cks:
CM may be hesitant to write a negative article about MatthewsUnderstatement of the year
CM are aware of the incident, and like any media outlet would write the facts as known about the situation -its not for CM to pass judgement but to tell the story and leave the reader to draw their on conclusions
Good stuff- I hope CM emphasise the fact that Matthews offered the family a third of the cost of the repatriation on the condition that they didn’t go to the media.
Contraflow:
Daytrunker:
Hope it ruins the company tbh serves em right if it does disgusting behaviour+1
Here here +2
Harry Monk:
senior50:
If you post a review on Google reviews that can’t be removed by the company
Just sayinGot that, thanks.
It has been noted on FB
Along with the reputational damage I wouldn’t be suprised if the masses draw VOSA’s / TC’s attention to the finer points of the Matthews opperation
For people questioning the cost, most people who have donated have decided Paul should have a 5 star send off so the target is for £20k+
£16320 atm
Plus dont kick off with any matthews drivers they are not to blame
Like all of us I to am disgusted with the company , and hope their customers are to and go elsewhere.
Gladly donated to the cause also, his family deserve to give him a good send off .
Plus dont kick off with any matthews drivers they are not to blame
This 100%
Drivers have shown by this tragedy we still can look after our own- lets not spoil that by small mindedness- Paul family need all the support they can get, they have lost their wage earner , we cant help every driver but at least we have shown we can stand together and help this one get home.
It’s a very sad and shameful state of affairs when a company can’t do the ‘right thing.’
I’ve donated without hesitation.
RIP to Paul and my sincerest condolences to his family.
If the insurance do not accept liability because a driver was on a break , does that mean their customers goods are not insured for loss or theft ?
Goods in transit cover but no cover for driver in transit .