Hello Frank,
I am very sorry to read of the problems you have had with your caravan, Caravans have been manufactured using the same basic construction methods for over 30 Years, and they still can't stop vans from leaking. I find that situation unbelievable. The car industry used to have problems with leaks but very few have now, and I know that the car industry is much bigger and can throw more money at a project but 30 years is a hell of long development time for no apparent gain.
I am sure you are probably aware that under the sale of goods acts, the warranty (not manufacturers guarantee) is exclusively held by whoever sold the caravan to you. As a retailer they cannot avoid that responsibility - it is the law. That does mean that if you used Hire Purchase agreement, then the seller is the HP Company - not the dealer.
Under most HP agreements, the title or ownership of the goods remains with the HP company until the last closing payment is made, and if the goods are faulty (as yours is) the HP company will not only be breaking the law for selling faulty goods, but their investment (the caravan) is not worth as much as their books show - which is an accountancy crime. If you have used HP tell them and see how quickly things get sorted.
On the other hand if you paid the dealer directly, then the dealer is responsible. Bear in mind that your contract is with the dealer - not Bailey directly, and if the caravan is judged faulty by any reasonable person or expert, then the dealer has no option but offer a remedy under the SoGA. It does not matter what Bailey say or do it is the dealers sole responsibility and is one of the business risks that a retailer has to endure.
On the basis of the information you have supplied, I think you were right to reject the dealers PX offer. I should point out that the SoGA is not an excuse for either the retailer or the customer to make pecuniary gain from a situation. The remedy to a problem should ensure that the customer is no worse off than if the product had not failed.
I admire your fortitude and restraint from naming names. This is the correct way, as any disclosure of such details would weaken and compromise your position.
I am very sorry to read of the problems you have had with your caravan, Caravans have been manufactured using the same basic construction methods for over 30 Years, and they still can't stop vans from leaking. I find that situation unbelievable. The car industry used to have problems with leaks but very few have now, and I know that the car industry is much bigger and can throw more money at a project but 30 years is a hell of long development time for no apparent gain.
I am sure you are probably aware that under the sale of goods acts, the warranty (not manufacturers guarantee) is exclusively held by whoever sold the caravan to you. As a retailer they cannot avoid that responsibility - it is the law. That does mean that if you used Hire Purchase agreement, then the seller is the HP Company - not the dealer.
Under most HP agreements, the title or ownership of the goods remains with the HP company until the last closing payment is made, and if the goods are faulty (as yours is) the HP company will not only be breaking the law for selling faulty goods, but their investment (the caravan) is not worth as much as their books show - which is an accountancy crime. If you have used HP tell them and see how quickly things get sorted.
On the other hand if you paid the dealer directly, then the dealer is responsible. Bear in mind that your contract is with the dealer - not Bailey directly, and if the caravan is judged faulty by any reasonable person or expert, then the dealer has no option but offer a remedy under the SoGA. It does not matter what Bailey say or do it is the dealers sole responsibility and is one of the business risks that a retailer has to endure.
On the basis of the information you have supplied, I think you were right to reject the dealers PX offer. I should point out that the SoGA is not an excuse for either the retailer or the customer to make pecuniary gain from a situation. The remedy to a problem should ensure that the customer is no worse off than if the product had not failed.
I admire your fortitude and restraint from naming names. This is the correct way, as any disclosure of such details would weaken and compromise your position.
Facebook
Twitter