CAR crime and road accidents are all too common, and there has to be a system to deal with recovered vehicles.

But tonight that system stands accused of being inflexible, bureaucratic and expensive.

In the worst cases, people who have already undergone severe trauma have been victimised all over again. We have uncovered shocking examples of bureaucratic insensitivity: a father of a teenage girl killed in a road accident told he must pay £300 for her moped; a wife landed with a bill of £100 to get back the car in which her husband committed suicide.

On other occasions, common sense has been jettisoned. A garage, well-equipped to recover a car stolen from its forecourt, was prevented from doing so and then invoiced for £180.

One York woman was hit by a demand of £400 after her car was impounded. Yet thieves had moved it only five metres away from her home. Her threat of legal action saw the police back down, which challenges any claim that the system is scrupulously fair.

It is sensible for police officers to hand over the business of car recovery to others. They should be concentrating on investigating the accident or finding the thieves.

However, the police have chosen to contract the work out to the private sector rather than set up their own civilian-run scheme. That introduces a profit motive. At £105 for the recovery and £12 a day for storage it is not cheap. Our investigation raises serious questions about how the desire to make money might sometimes override both the victims' feelings and common sense.

The police say they should not have to pay for recovering stolen vehicles, but why should an innocent crime victim? Justice demands that the thieves foot the bill, but there is no suggestion that they are forced to make good the vehicle recovery costs, even if they are brought before a court.

In the meantime, more discretion and flexibility from the police and recovery service are urgently needed.

Updated: 10:24 Friday, September 19, 2003