We have just taken delivery of a new Lunar Quatro 554 which boasts an excellent and large washroom. The shower is the biggest I have seen and has an eco setting on the showerhead so we will probably be using it more than on any other van we have had. However, when we got the van home last week we found a long strip of plastic lying on the floor of the shower compartment. I had a couple of adjustments made by the mobile engineer and asked him about this strip. He said it was to prevent water seeping out onto the carpet in the washroom and promptly clipped it back along the bottom edge. However, on closing the door it fell off again! He could not fix it in place permanently. I attended the dealers to have a look at a similar model and lo and behold, found a similar strip lying in the shower compartment! I enquired at the after sales office about this problem and another engineer told me that this was a common fault and "they all fall off, and there is no solution to the problem"! It appears then that this is a design problem from Lunar that needs addressing as a matter of urgency as we do not want wet carpets. Has anyone else encountered this problem and if so what have they done about it please?
Lunar shower cubicle
- Thread starter backwoodsman
- Start date
Hello BWM,
I understand from your posting that you are generally happy with the caravan, but the door strip is a problem for which you would be happy to have a satisfactory repair. You are however concerned about collateral damage because the strip is not of a satisfactory design.
I can't confirm the purpose of the strip, but your explication seems reasonable, and if it were not necessary, then why do Lunar bother to fit it in the first place - if its part of the specification, it should be right!
Whether it has a practical or purely a cosmetic role, it is part of the designers work, and as it does not fit securely, the design is faulty.
That is a classic SoGA none conformance, and in theory at least could give you grounds to reject the caravan. But that does seem a bit of a sledge hammer to crack the nut, and as it does not render the caravan unusable I think it would be difficult to convince a court to support a full rejection. From your posting I get the impression you would be happy with good repair.
As the value of the caravan will be in excess of the Small Claims Court value limit, I think that if you wish top be proactive in getting a proper resolution, you need to seek professional legal advice.
But regardless of what your real intentions are, you may be able to chivey the repairs by :-
Writing to the seller, any finance house (if you used one) and the manufacture stating that you are not satisfied with the caravan and identifying the issue you have found.
Tell them the dealer has been unable to make a satisfactory repair as the problem has reoccurred.
Tell them the dealer (name them) has shown you other examples of the same failure in other new caravans. This therefore is not an isolated problem but demonstrates it as a failure in the design or workmanship of the caravan which contravenes the Sale of Goods Act.
Tell them your concerns about potential damage to the surrounding materials and that you hold them that in the event the strip is not satisfactorily repaired you will hold them responsible for any resultant collateral damage.
Give them a reasonable number of days (e.g 30) to remedy the situation.
Remind them that you reserve all your statutory legal rights.
Good luck
I understand from your posting that you are generally happy with the caravan, but the door strip is a problem for which you would be happy to have a satisfactory repair. You are however concerned about collateral damage because the strip is not of a satisfactory design.
I can't confirm the purpose of the strip, but your explication seems reasonable, and if it were not necessary, then why do Lunar bother to fit it in the first place - if its part of the specification, it should be right!
Whether it has a practical or purely a cosmetic role, it is part of the designers work, and as it does not fit securely, the design is faulty.
That is a classic SoGA none conformance, and in theory at least could give you grounds to reject the caravan. But that does seem a bit of a sledge hammer to crack the nut, and as it does not render the caravan unusable I think it would be difficult to convince a court to support a full rejection. From your posting I get the impression you would be happy with good repair.
As the value of the caravan will be in excess of the Small Claims Court value limit, I think that if you wish top be proactive in getting a proper resolution, you need to seek professional legal advice.
But regardless of what your real intentions are, you may be able to chivey the repairs by :-
Writing to the seller, any finance house (if you used one) and the manufacture stating that you are not satisfied with the caravan and identifying the issue you have found.
Tell them the dealer has been unable to make a satisfactory repair as the problem has reoccurred.
Tell them the dealer (name them) has shown you other examples of the same failure in other new caravans. This therefore is not an isolated problem but demonstrates it as a failure in the design or workmanship of the caravan which contravenes the Sale of Goods Act.
Tell them your concerns about potential damage to the surrounding materials and that you hold them that in the event the strip is not satisfactorily repaired you will hold them responsible for any resultant collateral damage.
Give them a reasonable number of days (e.g 30) to remedy the situation.
Remind them that you reserve all your statutory legal rights.
Good luck
I can understand your concern, even more so when you receive such a response from the dealer. Seems the cottage industry mentality of the UK caravan business still reigns supreme in some quarters. Yet next week at NEC they will be regaling us with PR to convince us how wonderful their products are. I'd be very interested if you can keep us informed on progress as to how Lunar and the Dealer sort this one out........a dab or two of silicon?
Thanks for the input Prof & Clive. Generally speaking I am very pleased with the overall standard of finish, it is just this annoying feature that as you say SHOULD be right to prevent collateral damage in use. I have expressed my disatisfaction to the dealer and the salesman I dealt with who has been magnificent throughout is going to bring it up with Lunars general manager when he meets with him on the Lunar stand at the NEC. I shall be interested to see what Lunar say and take any follow up action with them depending on their comments. Keep you posted!
Hi again BWM,
Just to point out that even though it seems a little crazy, your dealer/seller is legally responsible to you for the failure, not the manufacture. Its the way the law works, your contract to buy a caravan is with the seller and not the manufacturer. Consequently for goods that do not meet specification or are faulty at the point of Sale, the dealer/seller is the party that has breached contract with you.
Under SoGA, and in a nutshell the seller must supply goods that match the description, to contract, that are of merchantable quality, free from material, design or workmanship faults and be fit for purpose.. If they fail in any of those regards, they are in breach of contract.
Unfortunately what often happens is, the dealer will frequently say they will have to consult with the manufacture. Technically the manufactures opinion regaring the cause, effect or liability under SoGA is just that, an opinion, and if a reasonable person based on the available information were t think the sellerhad failed under SoGA than the manufactures opinion has no bearing on the sellers liability.whatso ever.
Be wary though, this applies to claims made under SoGA, not the manufactures guarantee, which is a totally seperate contract between you and the guarantee holder. These are not required by law, and can contain many restrictions. However the law says that no other contrcat can supercede a customer stautory rights.
It boils down to the fact that sellers should check the goods they sell before they sel them. If they are faulty then they should be dealing with their supplier under their contracts. If they dont check the goods, then that is the sellers mistake and they have only themselves to blame for accepting faulty goods from their suppliers.
Just to point out that even though it seems a little crazy, your dealer/seller is legally responsible to you for the failure, not the manufacture. Its the way the law works, your contract to buy a caravan is with the seller and not the manufacturer. Consequently for goods that do not meet specification or are faulty at the point of Sale, the dealer/seller is the party that has breached contract with you.
Under SoGA, and in a nutshell the seller must supply goods that match the description, to contract, that are of merchantable quality, free from material, design or workmanship faults and be fit for purpose.. If they fail in any of those regards, they are in breach of contract.
Unfortunately what often happens is, the dealer will frequently say they will have to consult with the manufacture. Technically the manufactures opinion regaring the cause, effect or liability under SoGA is just that, an opinion, and if a reasonable person based on the available information were t think the sellerhad failed under SoGA than the manufactures opinion has no bearing on the sellers liability.whatso ever.
Be wary though, this applies to claims made under SoGA, not the manufactures guarantee, which is a totally seperate contract between you and the guarantee holder. These are not required by law, and can contain many restrictions. However the law says that no other contrcat can supercede a customer stautory rights.
It boils down to the fact that sellers should check the goods they sell before they sel them. If they are faulty then they should be dealing with their supplier under their contracts. If they dont check the goods, then that is the sellers mistake and they have only themselves to blame for accepting faulty goods from their suppliers.
Facebook
Twitter