Dreaded damp on second hand Unicorn Valencia

[chrisphoto]

My impression of the dealer throughout has been that they would rather try to seem to be as ignorant as they can be of the damp issues. All of the caravans they now know are damp/rotten underneath are still advertised for sale - of course I have no idea how they are going to approach selling them, but I do worry they may be sold in their current state to buyers who put every faith in a major dealer selling them a good caravan! I can't fault the lengths the dealer is going to in order to put things right for us, but the cost to them of repairing every damp Bailey on their forecourt will be pretty high - based on their estimate of ours alone it would be 60 hours at £60 per hour plus parts per caravan. Economics v reputation.....

There are plenty of threads on the internet about Bailey Alutech 1 water penetration. The gist of them seems to be that when manufactured the walls and floor were bonded using up stands fixed to the floor, but the up stands had gaps in each corner and in front of and behind the wheel arches. Rain therefore ran down the body of the caravan and could contact the wooden floor at the gaps. The fix was to fit a piece of polythene sheet (a bit like a thick sandwich bag) over the corners and seal around it and also reseal all around the floor to wall joints under the skirts and bumpers, but it seems that even then water can contact the floor although our dealer seems confident that it is a function of the skill of the repairer more than the method used. My advice to any Alutech 1 owner is to insist on moisture readings all around the van, from above and underneath, using an ultrasonic damp meter and fix any elevated readings ASAP with a warranty claim to Bailey. Bailey know about the damp issues but will never suffer the negative marketing of a recall unless it compromises safety.

 

[Raywood]

Given that these caravans are now seven or more years old they are probably on their second owners and not covered by the guarantee. Most dealers should be aware of the problem and will check the problem areas, so it may be when the owners come to sell them that they get a shock, although it should be picked up if they are serviced.

 

[Dustydog]

Get a grip boys!
I cannot remember a product recall from a manufacturer happening other than when Bailey were confronted with detaching alloy wheels. But was that Al-ko’s fault?

 

[Hutch]

Get a grip boys!
I cannot remember a product recall from a manufacturer happening other than when Bailey were confronted with detaching alloy wheels. But was that Al-ko’s fault?

It seemed strange that it was only Baileys that had the wheel bolt problem and not other manufactures using AlKo chassis. ?

 

[Dustydog]

Get a grip boys!
I cannot remember a product recall from a manufacturer happening other than when Bailey were confronted with detaching alloy wheels. But was that Al-ko’s fault?

It seemed strange that it was only Baileys that had the wheel bolt problem and not other manufactures using AlKo chassis. ?

Very true Hutch.
Maybe the others didn’t get caught :blink:

 

[AlexandriaUK]

You need to send it registered post, sending it via recorded delivery is only proof of postage not proof of receipt, registered post will guarantee that you will get a receipt of it being delivered into the company you send it to

 

[ProfJohnL]

... I can't fault the lengths the dealer is going to in order to put things right for us,...

I must say I can't understand why you have such faith in your dealer. The effort they are now putting into satisfying you betrays the fact they failed miserably to protect you during the purchase of your caravan. They are buttering you up becasue they know how much trouble you could bring to their door for miss selling your caravan to you.

They should have known the condition of their stock, and if the genuinely did not know about the damp, they have failed to protect their investment in stock, and that is management suicide. Their owners or shareholders should be challenging the Board of directors to justify their emoluments.

Personally based on your reports I could not trust them to mange the repairs properly.

The problem is we will not likely see any comment or explanation from the dealer, so we only have one side of the dispute.

 

[Dustydog]

... I can't fault the lengths the dealer is going to in order to put things right for us,...

I must say I can't understand why you have such faith in your dealer. The effort they are now putting into satisfying you betrays the fact they failed miserably to protect you during the purchase of your caravan. They are buttering you up becasue they know how much trouble you could bring to their door for miss selling your caravan to you.

They should have known the condition of their stock, and if the genuinely did not know about the damp, they have failed to protect their investment in stock, and that is management suicide. Their owners or shareholders should be challenging the Board of directors to justify their emoluments.

Personally based on your reports I could not trust them to mange the repairs properly.

The problem is we will not likely see any comment or explanation from the dealer, so we only have one side of the dispute.

Prof.
Surely as we both advocate. Stuff the repairs. Nothing but a total cash refund will do. He’s only had the caravan a few weeks :woohoo: :woohoo:

 

[Raywood]

I do agree that I would want the money back, but legally you have a choice, and everybody has to work out what suits them.

 

[chrisphoto]

It’s a difficult one. I fully understand the good meaning behind the advice to walk away, but will another dealer of used caravans be any better? This particular dealer is a large organisation with a seemingly very good reputation, and of the 2 other dealers local to me it seems to be the best one. I do not forgive the dealer for selling a caravan they must have known was rotten, but can all other dealers put their hands on their hearts and say they don’t do the same? When they take a part exchange they only see it for the first time when the owner collects their new caravan - do they lose the sale or take it anyway? Then do they spend the money repairing every part ex, or do they try to sell and hope the buyer is too trusting/naive to find the faults in the first six months, then act astonished and repair when they do?

The caravan we have chosen as replacement/compensation is being examined to death with me present. I feel confident it will be as good as a used Bailey can be - if Baileys can actually be good that is!

 

[Dustydog]

Good move going for a replacement.
Spend some money with an independent caravan engineer to give your latest choice a full once over.

 

[Parksy]

I've been watching this thread with great interest, because like the Prof, Dustydog, Raywood and others I've lost a bit of faith in dealerships over the years after reading a few caravan buying horror stories on this and other internet forums.
I can see why many are urging you to insist on your rights and to demand a full refund, and that would probably be my first instinct, to punish those who thought that they could cheat me.
The problem is that if you buy a used caravan (and even a brand new one in some cases!) and you properly inspected it and caught the dealer out as you did, you could reject the caravan, but you're still faced with the challenge of buying a caravan that you like, that's within budget and is absolutely fault free, all within a reasonable travelling distance from where you live.
This particular dealership are now all too aware that you know what to look for when buying, you won't be fobbed off or messed about and if they have agreed to make this replacement caravan fault free they had better live up to their promises because if the repairs are unsatisfactory you can still reject the caravan, and you probably would.
Well done for having the good sense not to take things at face value.
In your position Chris I'd agree to the replacement and I'd insist upon an independent inspection by a qualified approved caravan engineer before I accepted the caravan.
If the dealership fulfill their promises they have nothing to fear from an independent inspection, and you'll be a satisfied customer with the damp free caravan that you wanted.
By walking away you'll strike a minor blow for consumer rights, although there would be nothing to stop this dealer from selling damp caravans to somebody else who, unlike yourself, hasn't done good and proper checks before buying.
At least by accepting a properly carried out warranted repair on a replacement you will have taken some punitive action because the repair will be done at the dealers cost.
Thanks for bringing this situation to wider attention, by all means use your consumer rights, but the main point has to be that if we as buyers want dealerships (and eventually manufacturers) to raise the bar we should never become so carried away with the prospect of buying a used or new tourer that we do the salespersons work for them.
It doesn't matter how nice and friendly the sales staff seem to be, have a good look and look for the negatives, don't just sit there smiling and reinforcing the sales staff positives.

 

[Raywood]

Not sure I would say I have lost faith in dealerships but more accurately in some of them. The magazines surveys do show some good ones and I have to say I have never had a problem with most of the dealers we have bought from.

 

[Rodone]

I had one of the last pre Alutech ( 2009 Vermont) and I suffered various 'niggles' with it.I bought it brand new and it was serviced and damp checked each year. After 5 years damp was found around the wheel arch area of the floor both sides. The cause was easy to identify ( and cure ), but with a simple change of design Bailey could have avoided the problem, which was/is, the bottom section of the vans sides, are an addition to the wall, thus requiring a joint, which is covered by a strip. Eventually, water can get in behind this strip, which is exactly at floor level, and thereby get into the floor. Bailey showed no interest in either the problem or the resolution. Sold the van and never replaced it, but I would never ever recommend Bailey as I would consider it too much to risk, and like most of the other major 'assemblers of caravans' in the uk, have little interest in the customer once the product is sold.

 

[Dustydog]

Join the Club Rodone
I wonder why us tuggers still buy the junk but there you go they aren’t all bad once the bugs get ironed out. See the annual surveys done by PCv. Sadly nearly all the manufacturers continue to score poorly on performance.

 

[Rodone]

Hello Dustydog,
In the end I was no longer prepared to have very expensive badly designed , poorly assembled junk foisted on me. I generously described my troubles as 'niggles', but cumulatively, they just wore me down. The Thetford electric loo was a good example of poor design and although Bailey do not make or assemble the things, they still fit them. Ditto the on board battery charger - complete Tat. The front windows leaked and likewise the front side ones . The small kitchen sky light broke and had to be replaced. The shower surround leaked and the kitchen tap likewise. Some of these faults were rectified under warranty, but the local Dealer was a fair trek away. Then you have all the business of getting the van to themand back again. Anyway, I voted with my feet (and wallet,) and just hope that for your sakes, more of you protest strongly about this situation. The car/truck manufacturers eventually got the message, albeit too sake to keep the products UK owned.

 

[ProfJohnL]

hello Rodone,

I sorry to read of all the problems you had with your caravan, As you tell us each of the individual faults may not be major, but taken on block it they become a gnawing drain.

I won't go into details of the root cause but it basically comes down the manufacture failing to operate an effective Quality Assurance scheme in their business.

However it strikes me that the issues you have reported could have had an alternative remedy to using the Manufacturers Warranty, where it is your responsibility to get the caravan to the repair shop costing you money and wasted time.

One of the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and it predecessor the Sale Of Goods Act, actually makes it the sellers responsibility to resolve all such issues with the minimum of inconvenience to the customer. Specifically it is the sellers job to cover the cost of getting the faulty product to their workshop or subcontractor.

If more caravanners were to use their statutory rights, dealers would do their jobs with more diligence and ensure products the sell are free of defects to prevent the cost of recovering and remedying faulty goods.

 

[Raywood]

I do agree that more people should use their legal rights but I can understand the reluctance to use these against a dealer except as a last resort as you may not feel you want to fall mout with a firm doing the repairs. Frankly the cost of returning a caravan to a local firm is quite small and most people will be happy to leave this if all if the dealer attitude is good but I can see the point for those who have bought from a remote dealership and are faced with a long trip. Having read all the problems others have had I doubt the saving was ever worthwhile, although we have done it twice over the years. In both cases we have been lucky and had no serious issues in the first case and none on the second.

 

[ProfJohnL]

I do agree that more people should use their legal rights but I can understand the reluctance to use these against a dealer except as a last resort as you may not feel you want to fall mout with a firm doing the repairs. Frankly the cost of returning a caravan to a local firm is quite small and most people will be happy to leave this if all if the dealer attitude is good but I can see the point for those who have bought from a remote dealership and are faced with a long trip. Having read all the problems others have had I doubt the saving was ever worthwhile, although we have done it twice over the years. In both cases we have been lucky and had no serious issues in the first case and none on the second.

Firstly, if the goods are faulty in a way that should have been obvious at the point sale, then the dealer has failed in their legal duty to not supply faulty goods. They are in breach of contract. So why should a customer have to pay for the dealers incompetence?

if expecting proper service causes a dealer to become upset, then why are they in the service sector business, and dealing with what must be one if not the worst product group for customer disatisfaction?

In the OP's case he made a point of the fact it was long way to his dealership, which by inference costs fuel, time and loss of the amenity he has already paid for at his storage location. Not everyone is retired and may be able to spare the time for such trips for things that should not have gone wrong in the first place.

I am also fully aware that most of these sorts or problems are created by the manufacturers not the dealers, but the dealers should be fully aware of their legal obligations under the CRA, and they have no right to complain if they fail in their duties to the end users. Its up to the dealers to take the matters up with the manufactures and to wake them up to the fact that are not obliged to accept faulty goods from the manufacturers, and they should be returning faulty caravans rather than passing them onto customers.

Let the manufactures begin to feel the pain of their shoddy workmanship by having piles of returned caravan for them to deal with.

Ray its the approach you have suggested that sends the message back to dealers and manufacturers they can get away by short changing customers of their legal rights to fault free caravans.

Of course it helps to be civil and reasonable, but you can be assured the dealer would chase the customer if they reneged on part of their contractual duty, so it cuts both ways. You have payed for a "perfect" product so why should you pay out more time after time to correct faults that are other peoples doing or lack of doing.

 

[Raywood]

Prof, I do think you are misreading my intentions. If the dealer is close by and works well with you it is possibly unwise to upset the relationship for a few pounds. Dealers who become difficult should be pursued, but if you are looking at say £20 in fuel you do have to say is it worth it but if you are losing touring time and having to fight then sue them.
If the dealer is remote then I tend to feel people are taking a risk but accept that these dealers are usually just interested in selling and realise that if things go wrong they may get away with washing their hands. I think it is necessary to pursue these people and that failing to do so is part of the problem.
Having had a damp issue I have had to look at the problem. The dealer dealt with the issue faultlessly, took the caravan in when it suited us and the work looks excellent. Given that do I want to upset things in case there are future problems for a few pounds, and I have to say it is simply not worth my while.
At the same time a friend of my daughters has a problem. They bought a Swift from a remote dealer to get a good price and now have problems. The dealer is willing to do the work needed but this would involve a lot of traveling and expense but there has been no offer to cover this. Swift agreed that the local Swift dealer could do the work but as it was not bought from them refuse to do it. I have given them the name of a dealer who might help, but they are reluctant to pursue the costs aspect if they have to go back to the selling dealer. Basically I think they have learned a lesson and in future will look at other things than cost when buying, but I would personally not leave it at that.
Having spent most of my working life dealing with solicitors and litigation I am far more aware of my rights and just what success I would have than most, but the thought of using the courts puts many off. I know more or less what I can claim and do so when I have to, but many people feel this is too antagonistic and I have been accused of being too gung ho so perhaps I have modified my approach a bit as a result.
I think you have to look at each case on its own and say is it worth taking the legal route rather than a blanket approach.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Ray,

I strongly suspect that many dealers (and customers) still do not understand the full implications of the CRA.

Dealers are partly to blame for their demise if a customer lives a long way from them, after all by offering larger discounts to attract customers they must expect customers from further afield.

During the pre contract process, not only should the customer make sure they are happy with the dealer, but it also the time the dealer should use to make sure they are capable of servicing the customer, and distance from the dealership might be an issue. A dealer is not obliged to sell just becasue a potential customer walks through the door.

 

[Raywood]

Hi Prof,
My feeling is that by now dealers are aware of the CRA but many choose to ignore it unless customers bring it up. In practice most people will be happy if a caravan fault is repaired well by a local dealer and do not care if it is under guarantee or CPA.
The right to claim above the cost of the repair is not widely known so unless it is publicised more I suspect very little will change in the short term but it was noticeable before I retired that more people were becoming aware of their rights and pursuing them. The small claims procedure and internet forums like this are behind a lot of this I think and things may change slowly.
Part of the problem may be the way caravans are sold, although applies equally to cars and other things. They are sold by salesmen, with little regard for anything but commission and meeting targets, and future repairs and servicing are not their concern. With cars this is not generally a problem, but with caravans the local dealer often will not help if they did not sell it, and something needs to change there.
Modern culture is always buy it where it is cheapest, but this does not look at the bigger picture, and the problems this can cause with buying from a remote dealer. If people become more aware of their rights and enforce them, then may be these dealer will have problems and rethink their strategy but only time will tell. At the same time buyers might be better advised of the problems that can arise from this practice and might then think twice about it.