2023 Bailey damp already !

Page 3 - Passionate about caravans & motorhome? Join our community to share that passion with a global audience!
Apr 17, 2024
18
7
15
Visit site
The caravan had been in a compound and towed out onto a pitch which is at same location and all on gravel. Pictures where taken after caravan had been stationary for 48hrs.
The finance company gave me details of a company called Habcheck who would do and impartial inspection...probably at my cost ....is this really needed as the Ncc Bailey Approved engineer has already reported back to Bailey?
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,860
3,230
50,935
Visit site
....
The finance company gave me details of a company called Habcheck who would do and impartial inspection...probably at my cost ....is this really needed as the Ncc Bailey Approved engineer has already reported back to Bailey?
There are some facts in you favour, the first is an independent AWS engineer identified the fault. Another bailey dealer also confirmed there was a enough of a problem to request the manufacturer to get involved, who have asked to have the caravan in for repair. That is two independent businesses who have identified a problem, neither of which have any interest or reason to make a false statement about what they found, but both have identified a problem which is bad enough to involve the manufacturers warranty.

That sets out the seriousness of the situation. What it doesn't prove is if the fault or the cause of the fault was present at the point of sale, because that is the legal test that defines if the finance house does have liability in the matter.

Personally I believe in this case the nature of the fault is sufficient to show the goods were faulty at the point of purchase, but because of the way the CRA works, as the fault was only discovered more than 6 months after you received the caravan, the CRA sets out the customer has to show the fault must have been present at the point of purchase.

There can be no harm in trying to use my points above, but you may need to concede to the finance houses request. At least they have identified a company to use, but you also need to have confidence in their impartiality and they are not acting as a loss adjuster for the credit company.

If you disagree with the the companies decision, and have followed theit disputes procedure, you still have the right to lodge a claim under the CRA in the courts where being a civil case the decisions and outcomes are based on the balance of probabilities and how a reasonable person would view the situation.
 
Apr 17, 2024
18
7
15
Visit site
Thanks for that ...the faults in the ceiling were reported on collection but even if they were noted the company is in administration so they would be hard to find if at all possible.
I really don't want to get into a lengthy legal battle but having said that I won't roll over that easily!
I am going to speak to Bailey about the repair work and see how they are going to rectify the faults.
Will post an update in due course.
Thanks for all the advice from you all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mel and otherclive
Jul 18, 2017
12,770
3,598
32,935
Visit site
The caravan had been in a compound and towed out onto a pitch which is at same location and all on gravel. Pictures where taken after caravan had been stationary for 48hrs.
The finance company gave me details of a company called Habcheck who would do and impartial inspection...probably at my cost ....is this really needed as the Ncc Bailey Approved engineer has already reported back to Bailey?
It is probably preferable not use any company recommended by the finance company as that company althoug AWS approved may find in favour of the finance house. Rather pay the independent NNC AWS technician to inspect the caravan and then perhaps also have Habcheck view it.

When we rejected our caravan we had the same scenario from the finance house. I then informed them that I would be having an independent AWS check the caravan. Don't use a NCC MCEA agent as they are probably contracted to the finance house.
 
Nov 11, 2009
20,847
6,513
50,935
Visit site
It is probably preferable not use any company recommended by the finance company as that company althoug AWS approved may find in favour of the finance house. Rather pay the independent NNC AWS technician to inspect the caravan and then perhaps also have Habcheck view it.

When we rejected our caravan we had the same scenario from the finance house. I then informed them that I would be having an independent AWS check the caravan. Don't use a NCC MCEA agent as they are probably contracted to the finance house.
A friend of mine with a major damp problem in his motorhome used MCEA despite me telling him they could possibly have links to Black Horse. So he then had to engage a AWS technician.
 
Jul 18, 2017
12,770
3,598
32,935
Visit site
A friend of mine with a major damp problem in his motorhome used MCEA despite me telling him they could possibly have links to Black Horse. So he then had to engage a AWS technician.
In 2017 when they were affiliated with the CAMC it was okay to use them however when I took on the finance house regarding the crack on the front panel of our current caravan they referred me to the MCEA and that is when I realised that there seem to be some sort of tie up. Luckily for us they couldn't argue against the report from the insurance assessor.
 
Nov 11, 2009
20,847
6,513
50,935
Visit site
In 2017 when they were affiliated with the CAMC it was okay to use them however when I took on the finance house regarding the crack on the front panel of our current caravan they referred me to the MCEA and that is when I realised that there seem to be some sort of tie up. Luckily for us they couldn't argue against the report from the insurance assessor.
My friend did a number of things wrong. He did not use Which Legal Services, instead preferring the legal support on the home insurance policy. Used MCEA cf AWS. Arranged and paid for repair of motorhome . Home legal services apart from some small inputs to correspondence said they were not prepared to pursue/support the case. It had diverted outside of CRA 2015 and became a legal claim in its own right. After the second unsuccessful dealership repair the MH should have been dealt with via CRA 2015, but by sanctioning his own repairs it took it outside. In the end there was an out of court settlement well below (less than 50%) his expanses without liability. It becomes difficult when the heart rules the head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buckman
Jun 6, 2006
730
96
18,935
Visit site
From the pictures it is obvious to me that the water on the under has come down past the side skirt/mouldings, if the side caps are removed then you would more than likely find that there is no sealant on the mouldings the skirt clips into, so water runs down behind them and appears along the edges as per the pictures. It is very common and if left rots the floor around the edges.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrBoggybailey

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts