Fleetwood administration and warranties

[Scouser1]

Fleetwood went into administration on 6th January. I've just put my van in for service and there are 3 warranty jobs to do. Both Widnes Caravans (where it was serviced) and Washington caravans (who I bought it off ) do not know where to get approval for the work. Does anyone know who the administrators are, or what the curent position is?

Norman

please e-mail any answers to n.lidbury@blueyonder.co.uk

 

[mk1_gti]

Hi Norman, please use this link it shows http://www.fleetwoodcaravans.co.uk/

Regards

Rob

 

[Carl-GreyhoundsrUs]

Norman,

I have spoken to the administrators about similar worries with my Heritage but had absolutely no joy. As your dealers are still in business, and they took your money, the liability for any remedial work sits squarely with them. Unfortunately the dealer where I bought mine have also gone out of business so i am on my own.

Carl.

 

[caravanoracle]

the administrators will not honour any warranty.

the supplying dealer has the responsiblity so washington caravans WILL have to look at the problem but not automatically repair it though.

 

[spj]

Hi all,

It is a shame for the customers that Fleetwood are the latest victims of the current financial situation, Fleetwood were never interested in customer problems and the quality control was very poor for the price of the caravans. A selling dealer is responsible for any repairs but I dont know who would be if the dealer went bust, I suspect no one.

I had my 2007 Heritage changed for a 2008 model last year due to multiple problems with the van, the new one was worse than the old one and I got rid of it late last year. After dealing with Fleetwood directly and arguing with them for 19 months to get the van replaced and then a further 4 months trying in vain to get the new van repaired I had enough and sold it, most of the repairs I did myself and the others were not noticed by the buyer.

With a complete lack of customer support I can not say I am sorry they have gone, Avondale were just as bad, I had a 2004 Argente new which had front and rear panels replaced, the cooker was falling out, seats were sagging, the water heater was wired up incorrectly from build and the tyres were cracking at 22 months old, some defects were done under warranty and some Avondale would not repair. Maybe the current economical climate will weed out some of these manufacturers and hopefully leave the good ones. If I do buy another caravan I think I will be looking at the Hymers, but never another UK van.

spj.

 

[Dustydog]

SPJ

That's all well and good but with the pound virtually down to one Euro do you want to pay Ruro 33,490 for a Hymer Nova S690 for example??

I'm afraid some of our British caravan manufacturers got it wrong but on the whole I still feel our major British manufacturers are giving us what we want.

If they need to improve anything it's their pre delivery Quality Control.

Cheers

Alan

 

[colin(bridgend)]

Under the Sale of Goods Act the supplier has sold a product and if that product is not of merchantable quality the onus falls on the supplier. The buyer has no contract with the manufacturer - that contract is between the dealer and the manufacturer. Therefore Scouser you must make representation to your dealer for the work to be carried out. Depending on how long you have had the van and the seriousness of the faults could determine whether you have a case in law under the Sale of Goods Act to reject the van and have a full refund of your purchase price. Also if you paid for the van using either all or part payment with a credit card then the credit card company are also liable. Therefore I would suggest your first port of call would be the dealer, secondly CAB and thirdly the credit card company if you did use one. Good luck in your quest.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Good answer from Colin,

Under SOGA the seller cannot offload their responsibility to cover warranty to any one else.

If repairs are necessary, they are obliged to do them, if a replacements or refund is appropriate, again it is their responsibility.

That is one of the risk factors of being in business.

 

[caravanoracle]

i get fed up people mis-quoting and mis-interpreting the SOGA. a dealer has more responsibilty to the caravan in year one than he does in subsequent years. lets say you had a cushion with a problem in year one, then they would have to repair/replace the cushion. if it was in year 4 lets say, then there is no obligation to do anything. each individual item or problem is assessed on its own merit within the time the problem occured.

otherwise every retailer of every purchase car / caravan / boat or otherwise, would shut their doors tommorrow. the SOGA is not an endless pot to suck the money out of businesses on behalf of a customer. it is only there to make sure of fair trading, and really to protect the seller and the buyer.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Oracle,

I'm not clear on what prompted you to post about the sellers diminishing liability issue. I can find nothing in this thread that says otherwise, however, each case has to be considered on its own merits, so there is no fixed time scale.

 

[colin(bridgend)]

Oracle - obviously common sense must prevail. The scenario you have highlighted is going to extreme. Fair wear and tear must be taken into consideration and a cushion after 4 years in normal use would suffer in this way. What the SOGA covers is major problems.

I am a retired building surveyor and know from my own profession that, eg the NHBC cover (10 year cover)on new housing covers all aspects of construction for the first two years and the remaining eight years covers major structural issues. Therefore with all forms of purchase there has to be a period whereby the whole product is covered and as time passes so the responsibility of the supplier diminishes.

I did state in my initial reply that it depends on the severity of the problem which Scouser has not highlighted whether he has a claim or otherwise against rejecting the van therefore the seller has an obligation to the buyer which obviously as time passes reduces until the supplier is free of their obligation. This time period obviously varies depending on the product sold/bought.

COMMON SENSE MUST ALWAYS PREVAIL

 

[colin(bridgend)]

Re-reading the initial posting I would assume from the wording that the points of concern have been agreed as warranty issues. If this is the case then the supplier must honour this agreement and then claim redress from the administrators of Fleetwood.

 

[Dustydog]

I'm no expert here but if I had a Fleetwood I would be trawling the internet and Companies House to establish the precise financial relationship between Fleetwood and Adria. It's no secret their MD for the last 3 years has been a Slav, very nice guy whom I have met at shows.

I'm not convinced that Adria have zero liability here but this isn't something I've investigated.

Cheers

Alan

 

[ThePlotter]

Colins answer was partly correct you can claim on your credit card if you paid

 

[Thorpedo]

To digress slighly

Just as a matter of interest in case anyone ever needs to claim but worth bearing in mind when you purchase stuff.

If you buy a number of items in the same transaction on your credit card, lets say 6 chairs at

 

[ProfJohnL]

Oracle - obviously common sense must prevail. The scenario you have highlighted is going to extreme. Fair wear and tear must be taken into consideration and a cushion after 4 years in normal use would suffer in this way. What the SOGA covers is major problems.

I am a retired building surveyor and know from my own profession that, eg the NHBC cover (10 year cover)on new housing covers all aspects of construction for the first two years and the remaining eight years covers major structural issues. Therefore with all forms of purchase there has to be a period whereby the whole product is covered and as time passes so the responsibility of the supplier diminishes.

I did state in my initial reply that it depends on the severity of the problem which Scouser has not highlighted whether he has a claim or otherwise against rejecting the van therefore the seller has an obligation to the buyer which obviously as time passes reduces until the supplier is free of their obligation. This time period obviously varies depending on the product sold/bought.

COMMON SENSE MUST ALWAYS PREVAIL

Hi Colin,

SOGA does not differentiate between major or minor faults. A fault is a fault. and a custoemr has the legal right to expect a fault free product. If a failure is the result of some condition that was present at the time of sale, SOGA applies.

SOGA does allow for different remedies that might be appropriate, and the liability of the seller does diminish over time. Products with a short life expectancy (brake shoes or tyres for example) will be treated accordingly.

If a claim goes to court then:- each claim is judged on its own merits,

Whilst it is generally accepted that the extreme time limit for a 'warrnty' claim is six years. in practice there is no time limit enshrined in the legislation. the phrase 'A reasonable time' is used, and that allows for consideration of life expectancy, given the use the product is put to. If a customer can show that the use a product is put to is less use than normal, the seller's liability may be longer, the converse is also true.

I disagree agree that common-sense is the arbiter, common-sense is often wrong. I prefer to leave such issue to good-sense.