I have a 2005 Bailey Ranger that has gone back to Bailey for a new front panel as I found damp in the over head lockers aparently they have an issue with a few vans, it is down to a design fault and is causing damp to apear in the corners due to heat, might be worth checking it out if you have a Bailey. I had the caravan serviced at 12 months old and they didnt notice the issue it was only when I was cleaning the van to put it away for the winter. If you need more info please let me know. Regards Richard......
Bailey Front Panel Split
- Thread starter Richard_374228282
- Start date
Hi Richard,
I found a small split on my series 5 pageant vendee on the front panel when i was cleaning mine last weekend i was gutted as i've just had a new panel put on the back end under insurance.I thought it might have been caused by when they had to put the new awning rails on but when the fitter popped the seal out of the awning rail none of the screws lined up with the split so now i've got to go through the warranty.How come yours is going back to bailey ?
Paul
I found a small split on my series 5 pageant vendee on the front panel when i was cleaning mine last weekend i was gutted as i've just had a new panel put on the back end under insurance.I thought it might have been caused by when they had to put the new awning rails on but when the fitter popped the seal out of the awning rail none of the screws lined up with the split so now i've got to go through the warranty.How come yours is going back to bailey ?
Paul
Paul
The van was only a year old so when I took it back to the dealer Chichester Caravans they have already had one or two others with the same fault, trading standards have been involved and Bailey wont replace the van but will do a repair at the factory. Bailey's come with 6 year body warranty so have to repair it through that, they are stating that it is a problem caused by hot weather and has split on both front corners. I noticed the start of damp in both front corners of the lockers behing the lights. Best to check yours out with a Bailey dealer if it is still under warranty then this could be done free of charge.
Regards
Richard
In reply to Paul's question why the van was going back to the factory. Bailey take all vans that require any major warranty work back and carry out the work themselves. They consider it cheaper to pay the transport costs and do the work at the factory than pay the dealer for doing the work.
Hi Richard,
We had a new front panel fitted to our 2005 Bailey Ranger in the spring of this year, after I noticed splits in the corners. The work done appears to have been carried out to a satisfactory standard. I was wanting to know what to look out for inside the caravan lockers, ie signs of damp, as I don't have a damp meter to check it electronically. What did you see in the lockers ?
I was mostly concerned about any water that had got into the van before I had noticed the split.
Thanks Richard,
Regards, Mike.
We had a new front panel fitted to our 2005 Bailey Ranger in the spring of this year, after I noticed splits in the corners. The work done appears to have been carried out to a satisfactory standard. I was wanting to know what to look out for inside the caravan lockers, ie signs of damp, as I don't have a damp meter to check it electronically. What did you see in the lockers ?
I was mostly concerned about any water that had got into the van before I had noticed the split.
Thanks Richard,
Regards, Mike.
Mike
Sorry for the delay, I was clearing out the van for winter and noticed patches of mould in both of the front locker corners, the mould was like the type you see on rotting fruit a green/brown colour only about the size of a golf ball. I then took the van to the dealer who used a damp tester and confirmed my concerns.
Regards Richard..........
Sorry for the delay, I was clearing out the van for winter and noticed patches of mould in both of the front locker corners, the mould was like the type you see on rotting fruit a green/brown colour only about the size of a golf ball. I then took the van to the dealer who used a damp tester and confirmed my concerns.
Regards Richard..........
We're just about to buy a one year old van and when we looked around it today we noticed on the one side some unusual mould.
From the inside of the van its on the RH side, on the underside of the upper shelf and on the bottom windowledge.
The dealer said he would have a look in the week but we're now concerned. He said that he'd seen unexplainable damp before and not to get too worried.
On the drive back I had almost convinced my self that perhaps the curtain had got wet and that had caused it. There doesn't appear to be signs of damp on the walls, only on the wood.
We're just about to buy a one year old van and when we looked around it today we noticed on the one side some unusual mould.
From the inside of the van its on the RH side, on the underside of the upper shelf and on the bottom windowledge.
The dealer said he would have a look in the week but we're now concerned. He said that he'd seen unexplainable damp before and not to get too worried.
On the drive back I had almost convinced my self that perhaps the curtain had got wet and that had caused it. There doesn't appear to be signs of damp on the walls, only on the wood.
From the inside of the van its on the RH side, on the underside of the upper shelf and on the bottom windowledge.
The dealer said he would have a look in the week but we're now concerned. He said that he'd seen unexplainable damp before and not to get too worried.
On the drive back I had almost convinced my self that perhaps the curtain had got wet and that had caused it. There doesn't appear to be signs of damp on the walls, only on the wood.
Had an identical problem about 3 years ago with a nearly new Avondale Rialto. There were loads of those failing at the time. Once panels were replaced (had issue with rear one as well), van was absolutely fine with no further problems at all, so fingers crossed.............
Hi,
We have a Bailey Ranger 550/6 Series 4 (2006) that also has a front panel split, that has cuase 80% damp readings in the side wall (discovered on first service)
We had an indepeandant report report done by a loss adjuster, it was his professional opinion that the caravan should be replaced rather than repaired since he suspects that this has been caused by a design / manufacturing fault. The Dealer and Bailey are heavily pusing repair only so I am now going legal on this issue.... seems that this front panel problem is common on Bailey Caravans.
To date I have encounted x32 people with the same problem in that last two months alone (all vans are 2005 /2006 models) and my concerns and teh concerns of other people I have encountered are that if this is a design fault, will replacing the panel lead to the same problem re-ocurring at a later date?
Persoanlly I would look to get your money back... and go elsewhere
We have a Bailey Ranger 550/6 Series 4 (2006) that also has a front panel split, that has cuase 80% damp readings in the side wall (discovered on first service)
We had an indepeandant report report done by a loss adjuster, it was his professional opinion that the caravan should be replaced rather than repaired since he suspects that this has been caused by a design / manufacturing fault. The Dealer and Bailey are heavily pusing repair only so I am now going legal on this issue.... seems that this front panel problem is common on Bailey Caravans.
To date I have encounted x32 people with the same problem in that last two months alone (all vans are 2005 /2006 models) and my concerns and teh concerns of other people I have encountered are that if this is a design fault, will replacing the panel lead to the same problem re-ocurring at a later date?
Persoanlly I would look to get your money back... and go elsewhere
We had our Bailey 2005 500/5 repaired with this same problem last June after damp discovered during its first service, in both front and rear panels in our case. This cause was explained to us as stress cracks and the problem has now been resolved by using a slightly re-designed panel. After the repair the front panel is definately slightly different as we now seem to have a slightly larger front locker than before. We will be keeping a very close look out for damp in the future but so far it seems to have worked (touch wood). Must complement Bailey on the standard and speed of the repairs, which did keep disruption to a minimum.
When we had our first caravan with GRP a frame cover I made the mistake of kneeling on it, realisng how flimsy it was I took it off and Reinforced the inside by bonding 450 Gm Chopped Strand Mat to it.
Our Bessacar showed signs of week corners and some other areas so I did the same and reinforced the A frame cowl so I could stand or sit on it.
I also did the same with our Senators A frame cowl.
Of course this is not something you do to a new van, but surely the problems layith the way somebody is laying up the GRP panels.
The manufacturers are either using to little fibre glass mat or not reinforcing it in the right places. I beleive boat builders use Kevlar with Fibre Glass Mat to add strength and prevent flexing.
I asssume Caravan panels are made in Moulds, the first thing that goes in is the Gel coat followed by the build up of resin and mat with extra bits of chopped mat or mat going into corners where the mat goes thing as it stretches to fill the turns.
GRP foofing systems come with 25 year guarantees and GRP boats last much much longer.
We have in our family a small GRP boat built in the mid sixties
used to get to and from a floating mooring that is still in good order.
We get constant complaint on here about GRP panels and really the manufacturers and I guess the Caravan Council should be addressing the way these panels are laid up when being made.
Our Old Bessacar had corners that had little Mat on them and when you put your head in the locker you could see light through the Gel coat they were so thin.
I've also seen front Uprights between the windows where the Mould appears to have been flooded with Resin rather than GRP Mat or other reinforcing. The mat gives strength to the GRP panels, not the resin. Slapping extra resin around corners or points that will take strain or stress will not strengthen those points!
Our Bessacar showed signs of week corners and some other areas so I did the same and reinforced the A frame cowl so I could stand or sit on it.
I also did the same with our Senators A frame cowl.
Of course this is not something you do to a new van, but surely the problems layith the way somebody is laying up the GRP panels.
The manufacturers are either using to little fibre glass mat or not reinforcing it in the right places. I beleive boat builders use Kevlar with Fibre Glass Mat to add strength and prevent flexing.
I asssume Caravan panels are made in Moulds, the first thing that goes in is the Gel coat followed by the build up of resin and mat with extra bits of chopped mat or mat going into corners where the mat goes thing as it stretches to fill the turns.
GRP foofing systems come with 25 year guarantees and GRP boats last much much longer.
We have in our family a small GRP boat built in the mid sixties
used to get to and from a floating mooring that is still in good order.
We get constant complaint on here about GRP panels and really the manufacturers and I guess the Caravan Council should be addressing the way these panels are laid up when being made.
Our Old Bessacar had corners that had little Mat on them and when you put your head in the locker you could see light through the Gel coat they were so thin.
I've also seen front Uprights between the windows where the Mould appears to have been flooded with Resin rather than GRP Mat or other reinforcing. The mat gives strength to the GRP panels, not the resin. Slapping extra resin around corners or points that will take strain or stress will not strengthen those points!
we've got an '04 argente 642 (bought new) which has a crack/split on the offside rear panel at the point where the roof joins. there are also two identical splits on the front panel(one each side), which are level with the bottom of the windows and stem from the point where the side-walls meet the front panel. spoke to my dealer and was told to 'stick some gaffer tape over them and we'll have a look when you bring it in for a service (end april). we'll probably need it back in at christmas time for the work to be done'!!!. hardly a suitable answer methinks because:-
a, i don't want bits of sticky tape all over my van. and
b, we shall be living in france by then anyway!
i've been told since, that these splits/cracks are quite a common occurance on larger vans due to the flexing of the bodywork when being towed, and it would seem that from the above comments this would be true. i wonder if these problems are individual to uk produced 'vans or not?
all the best, .dave
a, i don't want bits of sticky tape all over my van. and
b, we shall be living in france by then anyway!
i've been told since, that these splits/cracks are quite a common occurance on larger vans due to the flexing of the bodywork when being towed, and it would seem that from the above comments this would be true. i wonder if these problems are individual to uk produced 'vans or not?
all the best, .dave
Hello Cris,
I have just noticed you posting of 19 Mar 2007 09:44 AM , and in the last but one para' you suggest that the NCC should be dictating GRP construction technique.
I fully agree that the caravan industry really does need to get its act together about manufacturing techniques, as we have agreed before its not rocket science to put together a water tight box on wheels.- as you point out the marine industry has been doing it for years.
Sadly the NCC does not control the industry. It is actually a trade representatives body, and have no legal teeth in getting their members to change anything. Membership of the NCC is not a prerequisite to being a manufacture, and in fact a few years ago some manufactures actually withdrew their support for the NCC.
Technically the design of a product is down to the manufacture and they only have to comply with a limited number of statutory construction regulations, which in general only relate to the roadworthiness, fire resistance, gas system tightness and potable water systems.
British and ISO standards are not enforceable unless they are governed by statutory regulations such as those above, or they are a requirement to support a CE mark - but many are self certified, rather than audited, so there are widely varying interpretations of the standards, some may be ignored or deliberately misinterpreted to meet company deadlines.
Whilst pressure on the NCC might realise some recommendations, it is going to take more than that to bring real changes.
As much of the cost of rectifying these unsatisfactory designs is borne by the insurance industry, perhaps they should be proactive in setting some standards for manufactures to keep repair costs down by proving that designs and manufacturing processes are right in the first place.
Alternatively, it would need more than just an individual to bring a case to court, but how about a class action to force one manufacture to prove designs more effectively. Assuming the action were successful, the precedent would be set and all manufactures would sit up and do the necessary work to make and keep caravans watertight.
I have just noticed you posting of 19 Mar 2007 09:44 AM , and in the last but one para' you suggest that the NCC should be dictating GRP construction technique.
I fully agree that the caravan industry really does need to get its act together about manufacturing techniques, as we have agreed before its not rocket science to put together a water tight box on wheels.- as you point out the marine industry has been doing it for years.
Sadly the NCC does not control the industry. It is actually a trade representatives body, and have no legal teeth in getting their members to change anything. Membership of the NCC is not a prerequisite to being a manufacture, and in fact a few years ago some manufactures actually withdrew their support for the NCC.
Technically the design of a product is down to the manufacture and they only have to comply with a limited number of statutory construction regulations, which in general only relate to the roadworthiness, fire resistance, gas system tightness and potable water systems.
British and ISO standards are not enforceable unless they are governed by statutory regulations such as those above, or they are a requirement to support a CE mark - but many are self certified, rather than audited, so there are widely varying interpretations of the standards, some may be ignored or deliberately misinterpreted to meet company deadlines.
Whilst pressure on the NCC might realise some recommendations, it is going to take more than that to bring real changes.
As much of the cost of rectifying these unsatisfactory designs is borne by the insurance industry, perhaps they should be proactive in setting some standards for manufactures to keep repair costs down by proving that designs and manufacturing processes are right in the first place.
Alternatively, it would need more than just an individual to bring a case to court, but how about a class action to force one manufacture to prove designs more effectively. Assuming the action were successful, the precedent would be set and all manufactures would sit up and do the necessary work to make and keep caravans watertight.
John I can't say I'm in to the ins and outs of the caravan industry but surely it is about time somebody set some sort of standard.
Over many years I've played around with GRP for car and boats etc and even roofing.
We had some projects that involved using GRP and I paid to go on some training so I had some idea of what we could do ourselves and what to expect when using GRP.
My motor sports interests also have me around a lot of GRP and Carbon composites and parts reinfoced with Kevlar and Polyester.
I realise that Caravans are in a differnet price band to an F1 car, but at the end of the day the F1 car has a bonded tub that is a life saving cell for the driver that they hand the engine off along with the wheels and suspension, yet the caravn industry can't seem to get a simple bonded GRP moulded panel to last more than a few months in numerous cases.
Taking it that a split in a
Over many years I've played around with GRP for car and boats etc and even roofing.
We had some projects that involved using GRP and I paid to go on some training so I had some idea of what we could do ourselves and what to expect when using GRP.
My motor sports interests also have me around a lot of GRP and Carbon composites and parts reinfoced with Kevlar and Polyester.
I realise that Caravans are in a differnet price band to an F1 car, but at the end of the day the F1 car has a bonded tub that is a life saving cell for the driver that they hand the engine off along with the wheels and suspension, yet the caravn industry can't seem to get a simple bonded GRP moulded panel to last more than a few months in numerous cases.
Taking it that a split in a
Hello Cris,
I cant disagree with you on this point.
As I have said previously, it is either the design that is wrong, or the manufacturing technique- that means the underlying fault would be present at the time of sale, and thus subject to sale of goods act protection.
In either case, it is the customer that looses out, because not only does the affected customer loose the use of something they have bought, that are additionally inconvenienced by having to accommodate the time and place of repairs, and ultimately the costs of repair finds its way back into higher prices for subsequent products and of course insurance premiums.
I cannot understand why manufactures do not invest in the proper people, and equipment to design right first time. In the case of panels, there is a long history of failures - why haven't they learned the lessons?
Modern CAD-CAM design packages can allow designs to be virtually stress tested this can cut down the cost of development, but the finished design still needs to be practically tested, and yet the same faults seem to raise their heads.
Of course what we don't know are the numbers of failures, and how that compares to units sold. But I am of the opinion that sufficient incidents have occurred to warrant any manufacture to question their design/production methods and controls
I cant disagree with you on this point.
As I have said previously, it is either the design that is wrong, or the manufacturing technique- that means the underlying fault would be present at the time of sale, and thus subject to sale of goods act protection.
In either case, it is the customer that looses out, because not only does the affected customer loose the use of something they have bought, that are additionally inconvenienced by having to accommodate the time and place of repairs, and ultimately the costs of repair finds its way back into higher prices for subsequent products and of course insurance premiums.
I cannot understand why manufactures do not invest in the proper people, and equipment to design right first time. In the case of panels, there is a long history of failures - why haven't they learned the lessons?
Modern CAD-CAM design packages can allow designs to be virtually stress tested this can cut down the cost of development, but the finished design still needs to be practically tested, and yet the same faults seem to raise their heads.
Of course what we don't know are the numbers of failures, and how that compares to units sold. But I am of the opinion that sufficient incidents have occurred to warrant any manufacture to question their design/production methods and controls
I think I saw that Bailey sell over 8500 vans a year, I can't see that they would be wanting to repair to many of them!
It seems to me that there must be a lack of consistency in the GRP panels.
This problem seems to be an on going saga and from a simple lay mans point of view an extra layer of strand mat or whatever should eliminate the problems without adding much weight.
It seems to me that there must be a lack of consistency in the GRP panels.
This problem seems to be an on going saga and from a simple lay mans point of view an extra layer of strand mat or whatever should eliminate the problems without adding much weight.
Cris
I think you might find the panels are ABS (blown/vacuum formed plastic) & not GRP. I think that is quite a large part of the problem.
Chris
I think you might find the panels are ABS (blown/vacuum formed plastic) & not GRP. I think that is quite a large part of the problem.
Chris
If the panels are not Gel Coat and GRP may they are just not fit for the purpose. I think some sort of UPVC plastics are used and the only way of repairing is by plastic welding and then spraying and that is not really the best of options!
Well repaired GRP can be stronger as the gell reacts with what you have there and more or less becomes as one.
Somebody mpre techmical here might know, but I believe plastic "welding" is not as effective and often needs filling and preparing due to distortion in the repair process before painting.
Well repaired GRP can be stronger as the gell reacts with what you have there and more or less becomes as one.
Somebody mpre techmical here might know, but I believe plastic "welding" is not as effective and often needs filling and preparing due to distortion in the repair process before painting.
The problems that I am having with my caravan and the problems that others whom I have come into contact with, all concern ABS panels and I am lead to believe (by a independant repair agent) that the best and ideally only way to repair these panels is to replace the panel in full.
From my research it seems that caravans with GRP panels do not suffer as many problems and those with ABS - but I could be proven wrong...
From my research it seems that caravans with GRP panels do not suffer as many problems and those with ABS - but I could be proven wrong...
Hello John L,
In your posting on 19/03/07 you say that a Class Action might make manufacturers sit up and listen, Class Actions can be drawn out and costly, but consumer power is relativeley cheap.
So what about if caravaners boycotted buying new caravans through-out say 2008 and also did targeted marketing towards the manufacturers about quailty issues, with next to no sales happening do you think that they may final sit up and listen to the consumer?
I am but one view but thousands of people sharing a common view could make a difference in an ideal world......
In your posting on 19/03/07 you say that a Class Action might make manufacturers sit up and listen, Class Actions can be drawn out and costly, but consumer power is relativeley cheap.
So what about if caravaners boycotted buying new caravans through-out say 2008 and also did targeted marketing towards the manufacturers about quailty issues, with next to no sales happening do you think that they may final sit up and listen to the consumer?
I am but one view but thousands of people sharing a common view could make a difference in an ideal world......
Yes William.
That's the take I get on it.
I understand that you can get replacement panels that are made in GRP from the caravan panel shop even for newer vans. No doubt a manufacturer would want to replace with plastic, but maybe for a repair shop a traditional GRP replacement might be a better option all round.
That's the take I get on it.
I understand that you can get replacement panels that are made in GRP from the caravan panel shop even for newer vans. No doubt a manufacturer would want to replace with plastic, but maybe for a repair shop a traditional GRP replacement might be a better option all round.
Hello William,
I concur that Class action is a radical approach and can be costly, but my reason for suggesting it is that consumers have been having the same problems for a long time now - several years, and still the manufactures have not sorted the issue of water ingress through panel joints - so consumer power has not worked in this case.
The manufactures have covered the cost of these incidents by increasing the selling cost of the caravan. So doing the repairs is not actually hurting them, only reducing profit.
Consumes have no direct sale of goods act case against Manufactures as the consumer purchases from a dealer. This effectively insulates the manufacturer from direct consumer contact, and where consumers do manage to get the manufacturer involved, the incident is quite low and it is easy for the manufacturer to ignore the broader implications of the problem.
A class action would bring together a large number of similar or associated cases and might included end users, finance houses, and dealers. Such a cross section would have a greater impact. The action would be brought directly against the manufacturer. The ideal outcome would be for the courts to adjudge the manufactures have been failed to use due process in the design or production of products, such that it causes unreasonable loss of serviceability and value to the owner when established techniques exists to prevent such incidences.
I have to acknowledge that the chances of garnering the required number of consumers to make the case viable is difficult, and most likely it would not happen, but if it did it would galvanise the Caravan manufacturers into action, as they would realise that they can no longer afford to use poor design and shoddy workmanship in their products.
The UK caravan industry is missing a major trick, If it sorted out its quality issues, it would be more profitable and there is a massive continental market place out there, roughly 5 to 8 times bigger than the solo UK.
I concur that Class action is a radical approach and can be costly, but my reason for suggesting it is that consumers have been having the same problems for a long time now - several years, and still the manufactures have not sorted the issue of water ingress through panel joints - so consumer power has not worked in this case.
The manufactures have covered the cost of these incidents by increasing the selling cost of the caravan. So doing the repairs is not actually hurting them, only reducing profit.
Consumes have no direct sale of goods act case against Manufactures as the consumer purchases from a dealer. This effectively insulates the manufacturer from direct consumer contact, and where consumers do manage to get the manufacturer involved, the incident is quite low and it is easy for the manufacturer to ignore the broader implications of the problem.
A class action would bring together a large number of similar or associated cases and might included end users, finance houses, and dealers. Such a cross section would have a greater impact. The action would be brought directly against the manufacturer. The ideal outcome would be for the courts to adjudge the manufactures have been failed to use due process in the design or production of products, such that it causes unreasonable loss of serviceability and value to the owner when established techniques exists to prevent such incidences.
I have to acknowledge that the chances of garnering the required number of consumers to make the case viable is difficult, and most likely it would not happen, but if it did it would galvanise the Caravan manufacturers into action, as they would realise that they can no longer afford to use poor design and shoddy workmanship in their products.
The UK caravan industry is missing a major trick, If it sorted out its quality issues, it would be more profitable and there is a massive continental market place out there, roughly 5 to 8 times bigger than the solo UK.
Facebook
Twitter