Help finding a caravan engineer who will complete a Section 75 Report

[otherclive]

I have been looking at web forums wrt Freedoms in winter. One going back to 2006 had a number of posts where owners used them all year round and none mentioned condensation orc”damp” issues. In fact comments such as “snug as a bug” and similar were mentioned. Some noted that later Freedoms had better insulation and heaters were hardly required. Unless the maker’s information specifically mentioned that they were designed only for three seasons use it’s not unreasonable for a purchaser to expect it to be suitable for year round use. Of course how the caravan is used can make a big difference. Even in conventional caravans one user has no or very limited condensation whilst another has windows and walls dripping.

I hope the OP can obtain an independent report to progress further with BH, as it’s too late for CRA2015 unless Which could see a pathway through.. One company that might help is MJ Lovell in Somerset who repaired my friends motorhome £10k, and Dusty’s Senators prang. They wrote a report with repair cost estimate for my friend. Unfortunately he hadn’t followed due process for CRA2015 so eventually finished up with an out of court settlement from the supplier and accepted a substantial loss.

A difficult situation and one that will need some hard decisions, including the decision to cut losses and dispose of the caravan.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Not sure I understand your comments in relation the the OP’s proplem. Might well be me.

Are you suggesting that the OP may have had usage expectations beyond, or other than leisure.

A buyer can also rely on inferred for their expectation of a product.

1. to conclude (a state of affairs, supposition, etc) by reasoning from evidence; deduce.
2. ( transitive) to have or lead to as a necessary or logical consequence; indicate.

John

My posting was a description of how the law in the UK views the process of making a purchase, where the onus is on the buyer to ensure the product (goods or service) meets their expected intentions.

Someone else mentioned the the idea that the Freedom caravan may not be four season rated. If this were the case then it may be the OP should have been able to find out about this from the advertising literature or from the seller.

Just for clarity I am not making any assertion about Freedom Caravans seasonal ratings which was why my posting was written in general terms to highlight the need for the Buyer to be Aware, and to ask all relevant questions, rather than making assumptions which may not be correct.

 

[Jcloughie]

My posting was a description of how the law in the UK views the process of making a purchase, where the onus is on the buyer to ensure the product (goods or service) meets their expected intentions.

Someone else mentioned the the idea that the Freedom caravan may not be four season rated. If this were the case then it may be the OP should have been able to find out about this from the advertising literature or from the seller.

Just for clarity I am not making any assertion about Freedom Caravans seasonal ratings which was why my posting was written in general terms to highlight the need for the Buyer to be Aware, and to ask all relevant questions, rather than making assumptions which may not be correct.

Thanks, but I don’t completely agree with your view particularly with regards to inferred usage. Your view appears to put the onus completely onto the buyer.


John

 

[Buckman]

The onus is on the buyer and not the seller to make sure everything is as described. However we now seem to be going around in circles and as suggested on several occasions it is best to approach WLS due to the age of the caravan.

The OP will probably struggle with any claim on a 5 year old caravan and really needs professional advice not found on most forums.

 

[Jcloughie]

The onus is on the buyer and not the seller to make sure everything is as described.

You are missing my point. It is what is not described but may be inferred.

That is. Most reasonable people would have an expectation of what a caravan is and what is it’s purpose and scope of use. They should not need to ask if they can sleep in it, will it tow, will it be OK all year round, etc.

If one chose a basic car then complained it could not cope off road then they could easily be shown to be using the vehicle beyond its purpose.

But, a caravan is just that, a caravan. It is reasonable to expect that one will perform as another. If there are exceptions. These must be provided to the buyer by the dealer seller, who has set themselves up as ‘the expert’.

Furthermore, the statement

‘The onus is on the buyer and not the seller to make sure everything is as described.’

Suggests that the seller can falsely miss-describe a product with impunity. Clearly this is not the case.

John

 

[Dustydog]

Prof said
My posting was a description of how the law in the UK views the process of making a purchase, where the onus is on the buyer to ensure the product (goods or service) meets their expected intentions.

Buckman says
The onus is on the buyer and not the seller to make sure everything is as described.

John has spotted the issue.

I take the simplistic view
The onus is on the seller to ensure everything they describe is true and the goods supplied comply with that description.

Prof takes a different stance , obvious you may argue , that the onus is on the buyer to ensure the product meets their expectations . Nothing wrong with that😉

 

[ProfJohnL]

Dusty
It's not a different stance, its two sides of the same subject.

A good seller will be interested to ensure their customer will be happy with their purchase, and will quiz the customer to discover what the customer needs or wants. That's just good business practice,

But the law employes Caveat Emptor, which places the duty on the customer.

Don't forget that the customer have many means of gathering information, the volunteered information such as advertisements, brochures, labels, verbal descriptions, and of course personal inspections, and by asking questions. Sellers have a duty to be describe the goods or services accurately. Failure to do so is contrary to the Sale of Goods Act, and may also be a Trades Descriptions offence

JCloughie
I never ever stated that sellers could lie with impunity. In one of my earlier posting I made it clear that sellers and especially traders and retailers are legally obliged to be truthful about the descriptions and information they give about products they sell.

For example a caravan may have had a history of water ingress, but has been professionally repaired and is presently dry. If a potential buyer asks "is the caravan dry?" the dealer can legitimately declare it to be dry. However if the customer had asked "Does the caravan have any history of water ingress?" if the dealer said "No" that would be illegal under the trades descriptions acts.

The law does not dictate what a seller must say about a product, but what they do say must be accurate. Unscrupulous sellers may try to hide certain facts by simply not volunteering them, and those are the issues the buyer needs to clear up by asking direct and open questions.

There is another scenario, where a seller may genuinely not know the answer to a particular question, their truthful answer must "I don't know". Dealers are expected to use theri specialist knowledge and tell the truth.

 

[Jcloughie]

JCloughie
I never ever stated that sellers could lie with impunity. In one of my earlier posting I made it clear that sellers and especially traders and retailers are legally obliged to be truthful about the descriptions and information they give about products they sell.

I never said you did. I was replying to Buckman #54 post.

I have never suggested you are wrong, just that a major legal segment was omitted.

John

 

[Buckman]

Either way WLS is the best bet as we are still going around in circles trying to elaborate on irrelevant finer details. The caravan is FIVE years old and that creates a problem especially with a history of repairs. None of us known the extent of the repairs done or what was involved.

Any report will be inconclusive as the supplier has done numerous repairs on the caravan since day one and it will be just about impossible to determine if the fault existed at time of purchase.

 

[Jcloughie]

Either way WLS is the best bet as we are still going around in circles trying to elaborate on irrelevant finer details. The caravan is FIVE years old and that creates a problem especially with a history of repairs. None of us known the extent of the repairs done or what was involved.

Any report will be inconclusive as the supplier has done numerous repairs on the caravan since day one and it will be just about impossible to determine if the fault existed at time of purchase.

Absolutely. But the number of repairs over time can also work in the OP’s advantage as it can demonstrate that the dealer has had every opportunity to bring the product up to standard. (But it is a bit long).

John