- Nov 11, 2009
- 24,698
- 8,864
- 50,935
I never knew about CRA2015 until I had a caravan. 🙈
- Jun 20, 2005
- 19,804
- 5,156
- 50,935
Ask Buckman
He has more CRA 2015 and Section 75 T shirts successes than the rest put together 👏👏
- Nov 11, 2009
- 24,698
- 8,864
- 50,935
Yes, and he must have the Which Legal Services long service award. He could make a mint offering consultancy to distraught owners, but I think he has better things to do with his time.
- Nov 30, 2022
- 1,914
- 1,779
- 2,935
From someone who enforced the drink driving laws I can say that it is in no way that simple. First up the offence is being in charge, which is a very long way from actually driving. Below is from the CPS website.
In relation to being in charge of a motor vehicle, a person is not guilty if they prove that the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of them driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in their breath, blood or urine exceeded the prescribed limit.
So basically the prosecution woukd need to prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, there was a strong likelihood of the person driving. If your in a MH or caravan, in your PJ's or similar, with the car keys tucked away in a cupboard etc (rather than in the ignition) that would be somewhat difficult to prove. The CPS would be very reluctant to authorise a prosecution unless the driver was sat say in the drivers seat whilst in physical possession of the keys, if they were in the glove box etc then they would almost certainly not authorise a prosecution. It could be argued that a campsite is still a "public place" so what if you have a drink or two there??
I cannot recall a single incident such as your scenario during my 30 years service. But, before anyone leaps in, it has probably happened somewhere, but the circumstances of that particular case would need to be very carefully looked at in their entirety.
Last edited:
- Nov 16, 2015
- 12,270
- 4,447
- 40,935
Hands Up, I unfortunately abided with more than enough alcohol one evening in Blackpool, I parked up my car in the pub, crawled into the back seat. Woken by Police, at about 3 AM , asking what I was doing, burbled , sleeping of course. Charged, with drunk in charge of a vehicle, 3 months discretionary ban.
If you told the police that you weren't in possession of the keys would they have the authority to search you and your vehicle to find them? Alternatively, could you hide them somewhere away from the vehicle and conveniently forget where you hid them until you sobered up?
No as its private land , whereas a layby is still classed as part of the highway.Don't know about public car parks though.
Not quite, the pub carpark may be private land but if it has public access (it's not gated or access is restricted in some way) then you can be prosecuted the same as if you were on a public highway. Technically you could be prosecuted on your own driveway but the likelihood of being convicted would be slim.
- Mar 14, 2005
- 19,008
- 4,230
- 50,935
Laziness and greed! on the part of the caravan manufacturers.
It is essential for all businesses to make a profit, just to survive. Break even does not cut it as inflation devalues what value you do make, so its fair and reasonable to make modest profits.
Just before the turn of the century when caravaning was a real cottage industry with many independent small marques, caravan design and reliability had plateaued, but the corporate finances began to take over all these small businesses and the bigger groups were established. I sense that since these mergers overall quality and reliability has deteriorated. and even allowing for inflation, warranty costs have grown across the industry. For profitable business, that means shareholder dividends will be reduced, as warranty is bottom line cost.
Given such factors most sensible companies would investigate to find out why their products were causing so many warranty costs, and then invest in the design process to iron out the deficiencies. It seems caravan manufacturers took a different approach, Lets simply charge the customer more to cover the warranty costs and we can maintain shareholder dividends.
Savvy shareholders should realise that it would be better to improve product design and manufacture. By designing in reliability, warranty costs fall, restoring shareholder dividends, so everyone's a winner.
But the caravan companies chose a different route. They deliberately try to limit direct interaction with customers, basically pointing them to the dealership network. This is entirely legal, but any company who is genuinely interested in satisfying the end user would be very interested in what users have to say, and they would take a more proactive approach to help resolving customer issues, possibly also in conjunction with the dealer. They would also identify what aspects of the product and service they provide that let the customer down, and use the information to positively improve this business model and products. This helps customers now and in the future by preventing the same problem arising again.
If this approach had be employed over the years I am certain the manufacturers could and would have resolved most if not all of the water ingress issues we continue to read about. The manufacturers will claim they have change construction methods over the years which true. The first caravans were basically hardboard, then metal skins with an inner panel, then the introduction of loose insulation, then in the 1980's the move to a bonded construction, and in the 2000;s the removal of wood that can rot. That 's 4 significant changes in 100 years! and still they haven't solved water ingress issues. The consequence may changed but the customer is still grossley inconvenienced and disheartened.
In other areas, the industry also seems intent on ignoring proven products made for mass domestic use, and goes out of its way to design new products which simply do not have the resources to ensure they are as good as the mass market products. Taps are great example.
It seems that manufacturers are more interested in building caravans with more bells and whistles year on year. I actually wonder if that is what caravanners really want, I have a suspicion that most caravanners who are looking for a new caravan, would prefer to have much greater confidence in the durability and reliability of their prospective purchase, rather than having extra gold plated bling.
The track record of the industry at introducing "new technology" is poor. Considering most caravans spend 80% or more of their time being unused, sitting in conditions that conspire to encourage condensation and corrosion, Its hardly surprising to me, that microprocessor controllers and touch screens and other "smart technology" which generally rely on high impedance circuitry which is sensitive to contamination, have high failure rates. Why replace a reliable switch with a potentially easily corruptible computer? The industry does not have the critical mass to be able to fully develop smart systems for caravans and to ensure reliability and ease of use are maintained or enhanced.
Caravan Manufacturers would do well to spend less on new blue sky thinking product designs, and rather focus on improving existing products.
Facebook
Twitter