I own a 2005 Sprite Major 5 berth van and have owned it from new. Just recently we spotted some water on the shelf under the front window and noticed that the front offside wall near the shelf was damp to touch. Further investigations uncovered a small crack, about 1cm long 1mm wide, in the exterior front panel of the van that appeared to start at a screw fixing the gutter rail above the front window and went to the offside of the van. Also noted was a split in the sealant between the offside awning rail and the van. Lesser splits were also found on the other three corners, all at the same height as the front window gutter rail. Our dealer has examined it and submitted a claim to Swift which we are still waiting to hear back from. This van is only just three years old, it had it's first service and is about to have its third. Unfortunately due to moving house we forgot to get the second service done although our dealer has said that they could "find" a service if required. As the van is only just 3 would you expect Swift to honour this warranty without any problems? If they don't where do we stand legally with a van that is substandard after only 3 years?
Swift warranty - how good are they?
- Thread starter farry
- Start date
i would say you are in deep doodoo,Swift monitor this forum and I would imagine they would be pretty miffed if a dealer 'found' a service and fraudulantly added it to your service record .Having said that it shouldnt have leaked and good luck with your claim
Hello Roger,
There is no legal requirement for manufacturers to provide a guarantee of any sort, as such if they do offer one (and most do) it is at their discretion and they can insist on any regime of checks and servicing to keep it valid. If you fail to meet any of their terms, they are not obliged to honour their guarantee.
Despite you missing one service, I do hope that Swift do consider your claim, as they know there is a history of problems with some of these large mouldings.
In the event that Swift refuse to help, there is another possible course of action. Under the Sale of Goods Act (SoGA) your seller should have supplied goods of merchantable quality and free from design material or workmanship defects.at the point of sale. An underlying fault may not have been evident at the time of sale but as time has progressed and with normal usage it may become visible at a later date.
With the age of your caravan, you will be required to prove the goods were faulty, but with the public history it should not be too difficult to satisfy that on the balance of probability it was faulty at the time of sale.
Now the tricky bit. The law is sometimes accused of being an ass, but in these types of case, the courts have actually shown a great deal of good sense. As a product gets older, it is more likely to develop faults, so when judging such cases the degree of liability on the seller does usually diminish with increasing product age. So whilst you might strike a moral victory, you might find that a proportion of the cost of the repair will be awarded to you.
Seek professional legal advice before proceeding.
There is no legal requirement for manufacturers to provide a guarantee of any sort, as such if they do offer one (and most do) it is at their discretion and they can insist on any regime of checks and servicing to keep it valid. If you fail to meet any of their terms, they are not obliged to honour their guarantee.
Despite you missing one service, I do hope that Swift do consider your claim, as they know there is a history of problems with some of these large mouldings.
In the event that Swift refuse to help, there is another possible course of action. Under the Sale of Goods Act (SoGA) your seller should have supplied goods of merchantable quality and free from design material or workmanship defects.at the point of sale. An underlying fault may not have been evident at the time of sale but as time has progressed and with normal usage it may become visible at a later date.
With the age of your caravan, you will be required to prove the goods were faulty, but with the public history it should not be too difficult to satisfy that on the balance of probability it was faulty at the time of sale.
Now the tricky bit. The law is sometimes accused of being an ass, but in these types of case, the courts have actually shown a great deal of good sense. As a product gets older, it is more likely to develop faults, so when judging such cases the degree of liability on the seller does usually diminish with increasing product age. So whilst you might strike a moral victory, you might find that a proportion of the cost of the repair will be awarded to you.
Seek professional legal advice before proceeding.
Thanks for your replies, hope I haven't shot myself in the foot with the question.
Hopefully Swift will be OK, certainly a large number of non-legal people I've spoken to take a sinilar view to the SOGA in that a van that cost in excess of
Hopefully Swift will be OK, certainly a large number of non-legal people I've spoken to take a sinilar view to the SOGA in that a van that cost in excess of
Facebook
Twitter