Reply revised inparts for clarity:-
I have just watched the Don't get done Get Dom concerning the family from Formby, who'es 2008 Swift Ace Jubilee caravan has had major water ingress problems.
I am delighted the family have been able to get their caravan replaced even upgraded with a balancing payment. They can hopefully move on and get the holidays and relaxation they deserve.
However the case does raise some very worrying issues which should not be overlooked.
Call me cynical but I strongly suspect that Swifts accedence in this case was almost certainly due to the high profile intervention of Dominic Littlewood. Other customers with similar situations have not been so successful.
A Trading Standards officer confirmed a consumers rights lie with the supplying dealer, but his input was not relevant to this families situation as the supplying trader had ceased trading.
In Swifts final statement they expressly deny any liability for the events that have beset this caravan, and in the body of the program, several times it was stated that Swift claim the original dealer had used the wrong parts for earlier repairs!
Just hang on a minute - Parksy is absolutely right If Swift had made the caravan right in the first instance, none of the repairs would have been necessary, so they were in fact the architects of their own demise.
I also take exception to Swifts assertion that the repairing dealer had used substandard parts. Surely as the dealer was acting on behalf of Swifts ingress warranty, they were under Switfs contract control, so any failure of the repair is Swifts responsibly, and SoGA should restart for the repair work. What evidence of incorrect parts was there? The independent expert made no mention of wrong materials.
Its interesting that when the manufacturer is faced with the reality of having their lack of quality control put on clear high profile public display they feel the need to 'help' Whilst I am delighted for the family, my thoughts are with those hundreds of other caravanners where manufacturers have turned their backs.
I do believe that this program has brought to the public's attention of the grossly unfair system that allows Manufactures to have total disregard for the quality of their products and the distress that their failures cause their ultimate customers. Whilst dealers may have the legal obligation to the customer, there is a clear lack of moral consideration by the manufactures.
I think its time that SoGA should be toughened up. All too often we read of customers being supplied with goods that clearly have not been manufactured correctly as in this case. The Dealer is of course liable under SoGA because they have supplied faulty goods, but realistically the dealer is unlikley to have been able to identify such faults when the caravan was delivered to them. To all intents and purposes the product would look satisfactory. So whilst the dealer is legally culpable, they were not to blame in the first instance.
SoGA is about ensuring customers receive a fair deal when products or services go wrong. I belive there is a case to have SoGA ammended such that if a customer has claim under SoGA upheld, then the same judgement should be reflected back down the supply chain to the point where cause for the failure arose. Manufacturers must start to take full responsibility for their own failures.
Facebook
Twitter