Swift not standing by their brand.

[scubamuppet]

We have been owners of an Ace Supreme Twinstar for some years. We have always had the van serviced each year to comply with the 6 year warranty. In general we are very pleased with the van however on the last service the dealer found a high damp reading in one of the wheel arches. He asked me to come back a couple of months later to have a recheck. This I did and found that although the reading had dropped it was still high. Closer investigation showed that there is a gap at the bottom of the wheel arch through which day light can be seen. Obviously a manufacturing fault. My dealer contacted Swift who basically said that it was not covered as at the time of service the van was out of warranty by .........4 days! I am writing to them to see if they will change their mind over this as I do like Ace / Swift vans. I will write again to let you all know what happens........

 

[Dustydog]

Hi Scubamuppet

Are you 4 days outside the warranty because the dealer told you to come back a couple of months later?

I assume the last service that revealed the high reading was done within the prescribed warranty time frame?
If so your dealer needs to get onto Swift and explain the failure was discovered within the time frame.
Good luck.

 

[Damian]

How long have you owned the van?

 

[scubamuppet]

4 days out of warranty at the service point. If I had known I would have had it serviced 5 days sooner. I have written to Swift today and will post a reply later. Perhaps they will stand by their brand .... who can say ?

 

[scubamuppet]

van new on 18.7.2008 and I purchased 18.7.2011. Last service 22.7.2014

 

[Damian]

The simple answer is that for the third and final services they MUST be carried out ON or BEFORE the date of the original purchase anniversary, in your case, 18.7.
A warranty has a specific time period which must end at some point, in your case 18.7.14
If the van passed all its service checks in the previous 5 years then the problem obviously did not exist at any of those service times and therefore cannot be ruled as a "fault at manufacture", or you would have had damp a long time before.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello scubamuppet

Whilst I can understand your frustration with your circumstances, I think your assertion the manufacturer is not standing by their product is unfair. Don't get me wrong I do believe caravan manufacturers could do a lot more to improve their products and services but there has to be some realism when considering situations such as your own. This is a six year old caravan.

The manufacturers are not legally obliged to offer any sort of guarantee, so when they do its actually a bonus. But because it is a bonus or gift, the manufacturers can tie it up with as many terms and conditions as they like, though they must not be illegal in any way. Just because its a gift, the guarantee is just as much a contract even though no money has changed hands, so the T&C which you agree to when you receive the guarantee are binding. When a contract such as this expires that is the legal end of any obligation the contract created.

The manufacturer has made it a critical part of the contract for services and inspections to be carried out to a strict timetable. The schedule includes some leeway on the timing of such events, so its not unreasonable to expect owners to comply. Failure to comply is breach of contract.

If your first claim for the damage was made outside of the contractual period, its too late.

The caravan was new in July 2008, and it is now Oct 2014 making it 6 years old. Also consider you are the second owner, the manufacture is not even obliged to accept any liability for second owners, its your good fortune that the guarantee contract was able to be transferred to you.

I don't think you are likely to have any claim against your seller under Sale of Goods Act because the caravan has been serviced and the fault only became apparent some 3 years since you purchased so you would be unable to prove the fault was present when you purchased it.

The reality is this is an older caravan, and as you will be very much aware from reading this and other forums/magazines, caravans are not the most durable and reliable of products and have an increasing probability of faults as it age advances.

Sadly this is another case where care must be taken to comply with all requirements of warranty /guarantee contracts to be able invoke them when you need them.

 

[xtrailman]

I would repair it myself
From what you have said the source of the ingress is known, so once that's sorted the damp should dry out.

Bailey also have similar conditions for the 3rd service, something I was very careful to adhere too.

We have been owners of an Ace Supreme Twinstar for some years. We have always had the van serviced each year to comply with the 6 year warranty. In general we are very pleased with the van however on the last service the dealer found a high damp reading in one of the wheel arches. He asked me to come back a couple of months later to have a recheck. This I did and found that although the reading had dropped it was still high. Closer investigation showed that there is a gap at the bottom of the wheel arch through which day light can be seen. Obviously a manufacturing fault. My dealer contacted Swift who basically said that it was not covered as at the time of service the van was out of warranty by .........4 days! I am writing to them to see if they will change their mind over this as I do like Ace / Swift vans. I will write again to let you all know what happens........

 

[Raywood]

Swift are technically right although it reflects very badly on them. You do have to be very careful with the warranty terms and it looks as if you missed the point of the correct date for the final service.
A claim against the dealer would only stand up if you could get good independent evidence to show that the fault was there at the time of purchase and as shown with other cases this can be difficult.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Swift are technically right although it reflects very badly on them. You do have to be very careful with the warranty terms and it looks as if you missed the point of the correct date for the final service...............

Hello Ray,

You know I feel the manufacturers are often less than fully customer orientated, but lets be fair, at least most manufacturers do offer a formal warranty, which over recent years has grown in length of coverage. But there has to be a cut off point somewhere, and this one is set clearly in their warranty documentation. Its a contract with a finite life.

When your insurance expires, if you don't renew you wouldn't expect the company to cover you beyond the expiry date. Why should the caravan company be any different with their warranty policy?

The customer agrees to the contract when they sign up to it, and therefore must be bound by it

I question the morals of a customer who tries to get more from the warranty than they are entitled or contracted to do.

 

[Royston]

I too have experienced warranty problems in the past, dates are very important, on hindsight you should have booked your van in for a service at least a couple of months prior to the final date of the warranty , then the Dealer would have had time to fix it.. I am lucky because My present Dealer always advises this.

Royston

 

[Damian]

Quote " dates are very important"

Dates are the most important thing to get right with caravan warranties, so making absolutely certain you READ and take in the details WHEN YOU BUY the van is paramount.

There are leeway dates for certain service dates, namely the 1st,and 2nd which can be within a certain time frame either side of the anniversary of purchase date.

The 3rd service MUST be completed ON or BEFORE the 3rd anniversary of the date of purchase.(because most of the appliances have a 3 year warranty and any faults MUST be declared BEFORE the warranty expires)

Then depending on the wording of the water ingress guarantee specific services as stated in the particular caravan manufactures Terms and Conditions MUST be completed ON or BEFORE the purchase anniversary date, especially the last one.

It is the PURCHASERS responsibility to adhere to the T&C's.

 

[xtrailman]

Prof
I don't why you should question anyone for making a claim?

Car manufactures often contribute to out of warranty repairs.

 

[Damian]

Quote " Car manufactures often contribute to out of warranty repairs."

It is no use trying to compare car situations with caravan situations, they are entirely different on all levels.

 

[Raywood]

Hi Prof.
I basically agree with you but there is a thing called customer care which is sadly lacking in the caravan industry as a whole. Given the very minor error here by the OP a reasonable answer might have been to at least contribute something. You do however get the problem then is if the next person is five days out of warranty when do you stop which is the problem.
I am not convinced that the longer warranties are anything to do with customer service, but simply the first offered was to give that firm a competitive edge and the others then had to follow suit. The way some have tried to wriggle out of genuine claims makes you wince sometimes and even when they accept them, customers, who should be valued and given prompt service, are left waiting for months for what should be stock parts to sent out.
Not sure who is the cynic, me them or both.

Swift are technically right although it reflects very badly on them. You do have to be very careful with the warranty terms and it looks as if you missed the point of the correct date for the final service...............

Hello Ray,

You know I feel the manufacturers are often less than fully customer orientated, but lets be fair, at least most manufacturers do offer a formal warranty, which over recent years has grown in length of coverage. But there has to be a cut off point somewhere, and this one is set clearly in their warranty documentation. Its a contract with a finite life.

When your insurance expires, if you don't renew you wouldn't expect the company to cover you beyond the expiry date. Why should the caravan company be any different with their warranty policy?

The customer agrees to the contract when they sign up to it, and therefore must be bound by it

I question the morals of a customer who tries to get more from the warranty than they are entitled or contracted to do.

 

[Dustydog]

I don't see why a car manufacturer is any different to a caravan manufacturer.
Invariably a caravan can cost more than the towing vehicle. I'd be very disappointed if no goodwill was forthcoming from Swift although contractually I accecpt Swift are correct.
In this case and on the balance of probability I suspect the water ingress started prior to the expiry date.
Let's hope Swift can demonstrate some good customer care on this case without setting a precedent.