Message Forums

Hi Everyone,

We have had some devasting news of our Sterling Ruby Eccles 2010 model.  We ordered this caravan september 2009 with a delivery of Xmas 2009.  We have had it two years. It has recently had its 2nd service where we asked the question of why is there a dull patch on the outside of the caravan on the door side to the top corner. Only to be told by Catterack Caravans the dealer where we bought the caravan from that it is probably a factory repair.  We were devasted to learn of this and to be told there was nothing we could do about it or them. The lady told us that even themselves dont get told of caravans that have had a factory repair.  I find this hard to believe when she knew straight away that's what it was.  Apparently, the dullness of the patch can take years to come out which is why we have noticed it until now  and has the possibility of getting worse to the rest of the caravan.  We are gutted about this and wonder if anyone who reads this post could advise us what we could do about it.  According to the lady of Catterick we were best going on forums and may be swift might just pick up on it.  We have dealt with swift before about other teething problems of the caravan in our first year and have never got anywhere by them.  Many thanks for reading.  Yorkie  

There is unlikely to be anyone on a forum that can offer more than sympathy. What you really need to do is to contact Swift direct with photos and Vin number of the caravan. It would seem strange that any repair would take 2 years to be noticed so perhaps there is an alternative explanation? Lets hope your dealer is not trying to pull the wool!!! Swift do have their own forum.

David

Let’s just accept for one moment that the explanation from Catterick Caravans is correct. This was a new van according to the OP, and he purchased it from a dealer. (There is no indication in the post that HP was used. If so, the answer, or remedy, may be different.)

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) applies to the contract for the purchase of the van. That indicates that the van must be of satisfactory Quality, sufficiently durable and free from any defects.

Let’s take the “satisfactory quality” condition. To be of “satisfactory quality” it must be what a ‘reasonable person’ would regard as acceptable. In determining that the law will take into account some factors that are probably not relevant to the OP’s case such as price, fitness for purpose specified, appearance, safety and durability. For the OP the law will also consider the finish and freedom from minor blemishes as factors which decide whether the van is of “satisfactory quality”. Paying some £15/1600 for a van also adds to an argument that the finish should be spot on.

From the description set out by the OP the van may not be free of a minor blemish. I cannot judge from the description. Now, assuming that the OP was not made aware of the defect when the van was purchased, and it is a minor blemish or worse, he would be within his rights to complain to Catterick Caravans.

All well and good so far. However, the Sale of Goods Act and the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 set out the burden of proof in contract disputes of this nature. The OP has had the van for two years so it is now up to the OP to prove the fault did not occur through misuse, perhaps using the wrong kind of cleaner for example. The Dealer, with whom the OP has that SOGA contract and against whom he must pursue any claim under the Act, does not have to do anything if the OP cannot prove that the fault was there when the van was sold. It matters not, in law, that the OP knows he has done nothing wrong, he has to prove it. After all, disputes are a two way street, and the dealer does not know that the OP did nothing wrong without such proof.

For the benefit of the OP the dealer has said that “it is probably a factory repair”. Whilst that is an observation, rather than an assurance of fact, it may be helpful to the OP. The OP does not understand the problem and so has gone to an expert (Catterick Caravans) for advice. The word “probably” is not helpful, however, if these are the exact words of the Catterick Caravans rep.

Catterick Caravans have suggested that the OP seeks advice from message boards. Pretty daft advice if you are Catterick Caravans as along comes this ….

Showing a bucketful of naiviety ask Catterick Caravans if they can give you a letter confirming that they have inspected the defect and that they have concluded that it is as a result of a factory repair before the van was sold as new. Tell Catterick Caravans that you need that to take it up with Swift. Once you have that letter then ask Catterick Caravans to remedy the defect which was present when you bought the van, evidenced by their expert written advice. May sound like a slightly dishonest approach, but without if the OP cannot proove his case that may be all he has!

In the alternative check out your swift warranty which indicates a three year warranty other than for body shell. This covers defective parts or fittings. You would need to argue that the paint was a “part” or defective materials. The OP does not indicate that the paint is itself defective, just different to the rest of the van.  There are, of course, a whole raft of exclusion clauses in that warranty. Again, the onus is on the OP to prove the case.

So, there is a potential remedy, but it may be a challenge to secure the required result.

Phil

Phil

What would be the situation if the dealer had ceased trading ?

Depends where you are i nthe actual process.

If the company is in liquidation then the liquidator could sort your problem out, but he can also disclaim your contract. (s178 Insolvency Act 1986). So it does not exist.

If the company is in administration your contract to purchase the van would have transferred to him and maybe he could deal with the problem. However, the administrator may decide, on what is called a balance of fairness test, not to perform the contract if that would help to achieve the purpose of the administration. If he does then you can apply to the High Court for specific performance of the contract and if the Court does not agree to your request, then you are unsecured creditor.

pass on shoddy below standard products and hope nobody notices or cant be arsed to complain if they do notice.

agree fully.

Thank you for your replies. 

After going back to the dealer and voicing our grievance.  It has come to light that Swift has accepted liability and are going to re spray the side of the van.

Yorkie