The role of NCC Ltd.

[Ern]

I don't mind a Trade Body which has interests in a related business, as in the commercial world this is quite common. We have seen what looks like attempts by NCC Ltd to promote itself as some sort of technical authority, to be a vehicle registration body. An insurance company refusing to pay a claim until NCC ownership paperwork is obtained sounds like a monopolistic practice to me. Caravan manufacturers demanding service personnel be NCC registered, when competence does not depend on it sounds like another. Would the Automotive industry get away with this? I could go on.

 

[Anseo]

I don't mind a Trade Body which has interests in a related business, as in the commercial world this is quite common. We have seen what looks like attempts by NCC Ltd to promote itself as some sort of technical authority, to be a vehicle registration body. An insurance company refusing to pay a claim until NCC ownership paperwork is obtained sounds like a monopolistic practice to me. Caravan manufacturers demanding service personnel be NCC registered, when competence does not depend on it sounds like another. Would the Automotive industry get away with this? I could go on.

Please do go on and give more examples .

 

[otherclive]

You guys have really opened a can of worms.According to the Beta Companies House register there are 7 directors of the NCC. 5 of the directors are major shareholders in 5 main caravan dealers one of which is a “paper “ company for one of the main Midland area dealers. I have not named them here to be Forum rule compliant. I have to conclude the NCCis nothing short of the old pals act or in a nutshell an absolute sham!!

Surprised that it’s taken so long for the true purpose of the NCC to be revealed. It’s never hidden its sructure and role as a body to further the interests of the trade. Unfortunately the buyer doesn’t feature too highly in that role despite being key to the success of the trade.

 

[Buckman]

The annual service as we know it today was created by the caravan manufacturers (Bailey first with their bolted construction which required annual checking and torque testing. After some time they realised the torque issue was not a problem, so the checks were dropped). The compulsory annual inspection was required to support the extended warranty, which was more or less forced upon the manufacturers by dissatisfied retailers and customers. Discovering the water ingress before it had done too much damage would reduce the manufacturer's warranty liability, but the cost? The answer was to get the customer to pay for it. The damp test became part of a service which is a padded out list of rather simplistic checks, most of which we all do every time we use the caravan. Today, the damp test as we call it isn't even done on some caravans, and reduced on others. The service technician training and AWS scheme is a nice little earner for its creator and the content of the service list, and much more is controlled by NCC Ltd. Preventive Maintenance is a good thing and for anything on the road a safety matter to be taken seriously, but most of the content of the annual service is nothing to do with that.

I may be mistaken or misunderstanding the CRA 2015 as nowhere in the CRA 2015 is it mandatory to have an annual service for the CRA 2015 to lapse.
In essence even if you do not have an annual service if damp is found 2 years later you can probably still claim from the dealer as more than likely the damp would be due to an inherent fault and there at time of purchase.

 

[Ern]

Please do go on and give more examples .

Now then Prof' I think you are trying to egg me on here There is another thread "Weight upgrade" running which mentions similar matters. There is danger of getting cross threaded. I wonder if Practical Caravan is a trade member of NCC Ltd.

 

[Dustydog]

Surprised that it’s taken so long for the true purpose of the NCC to be revealed. It’s never hidden itS structure and role.

I have to say Clive this is the first time I’ve checked them out at Companies House. Previously only looked at their website. Whilst they say they have a dispute resolution service for us guys, it is obvious impartiality does not exist! Stick with the best tool for dispute resolution. The CRA 2015 as referred to by Parksy and Buckman.
Ern, I am confident neither PCv nor their owner , Future Publing plc, are members of the NCC.

 

[otherclive]

Now then Prof' I think you are trying to egg me on here There is another thread "Weight upgrade" running which mentions similar matters. There is danger of getting cross threaded. I wonder if Practical Caravan is a trade member of NCC Ltd.

“Prof”???

 

[Anseo]

Now then Prof' I think you are trying to egg me on here There is another thread "Weight upgrade" running which mentions similar matters. There is danger of getting cross threaded. I wonder if Practical Caravan is a trade member of NCC Ltd.

I think you are a little mixed up Ern, I have absolutely no connection to any "Prof" whatsover .

 

[Dustydog]

“Prof”???

🙀🙀🙀

 

[Raywood]

I may be mistaken or misunderstanding the CRA 2015 as nowhere in the CRA 2015 is it mandatory to have an annual service for the CRA 2015 to lapse.
In essence even if you do not have an annual service if damp is found 2 years later you can probably still claim from the dealer as more than likely the damp would be due to an inherent fault and there at time of purchase.

Yes you might still be able to claim from the dealer, but only for the damage that had been happened when you should first have discovered it. This would be normally that first missing service. After that your failure would mean that the subsequent damage was your fault and your responsibility. Trying to sort that would not be easy, but you cannot claim against the dealer for your own failure to maintain or take reasonable precautions.

 

[Buckman]

Yes you might still be able to claim from the dealer, but only for the damage that had been happened when you should first have discovered it. This would be normally that first missing service. After that your failure would mean that the subsequent damage was your fault and your responsibility. Trying to sort that would not be easy, but you cannot claim against the dealer for your own failure to maintain or take reasonable precautions.

Where is this quoted in the CRA 2015? It may be 18 months , 2 or even 3 years before you discover the issue and damp is normally an inherent issue due to poor design or an issue during manufacture. At what point would subsequent damage be your fault and your responsibility with reference to CRA 2015? I do nto know the answer so would be pleased if you could answer any of the questions. Thanks.

 

[otherclive]

Where is this quoted in the CRA 2015? It may be 18 months , 2 or even 3 years before you discover the issue and damp is normally an inherent issue due to poor design or an issue during manufacture. At what point would subsequent damage be your fault and your responsibility with reference to CRA 2015? I do nto know the answer so would be pleased if you could answer any of the questions. Thanks.

I think it would come under the owners responsibility for reasonable care. If the maker stipulates an annual service which includes damp check then the owners failure to have an annual service or damp check would reduce the dealers liability. CRA 2015 isn’t a free for all to take dealers/ sellers to the cleaners. Strange as it may seem the owner has certain responsibilities too. In civil law everything does not have to be defined to the nth degree. Civil law would take into account all of the relevant circumstances and balance of probabilitieS.

 

[JezzerB]

Ok am I being naive here-but the caravan industry does need a collective voice-if only to protect it against possilby negative legislation that might be introduced-though of course the B+E licence drop in the late 90s proved they didn't /don't have much influence perhaps-as this rule alone must have put many off buying more expensive larger vans. However the issue lies in the fact that they purport also to protecting the consumer like the SMMT -who can act as a go between between car and garage/maker complaints. Clearly they don't seem to do this. I'm not sure what their standards are re the build of a caravan -it does seem they bandy their approval meaning there are some basic electrical/ build safety standards but am still not convince d and after reading on here feel they could/should be doing a lot better but are simply paid for representatives of the caravan industry as a whole. Maybe time for another body ??

 

[Buckman]

I think it would come under the owners responsibility for reasonable care. If the maker stipulates an annual service which includes damp check then the owners failure to have an annual service or damp check would reduce the dealers liability. CRA 2015 isn’t a free for all to take dealers/ sellers to the cleaners. Strange as it may seem the owner has certain responsibilities too. In civil law everything does not have to be defined to the nth degree. Civil law would take into account all of the relevant circumstances and balance of probabilities.

Thank you I do understand where you are coming from, but there is nothing in the legislation that covers what you have written unless I have missed it somewhere or misunderstood the legal terms.
I would never suggest that any one tries to give an annual service a miss due to implications however by the same token, would you really want to pay £200+ for a service if your caravan has not moved in the past year? In 2020 our caravan did a total of 750 miles, but I still had to pay £280 for the annual service. This year will be similar althouhg this time around I will be using an AWS technician.!

 

[otherclive]

Thank you I do understand where you are coming from, but there is nothing in the legislation that covers what you have written unless I have missed it somewhere or misunderstood the legal terms.
I would never suggest that any one tries to give an annual service a miss due to implications however by the same token, would you really want to pay £200+ for a service if your caravan has not moved in the past year? In 2020 our caravan did a total of 750 miles, but I still had to pay £280 for the annual service. This year will be similar althouhg this time around I will be using an AWS technician.!

In civil law there doesn’t need to be so much detail it is down to the two parties to present their case based as required on contractEd terms, situation and precedent. The judge then decides. That’s why you can have judgements that award a proportion of the claim. Unlike criminal law where you couldn’t realistically have some one convicted of 50% of a murder. If the owner declines to have the caravan serviced that's their decision. If makers haven’t given concessions to extend service intervals then the onus is on the owner. So if after say two years between services and damp checks a van is found to have damp and or damage the owner will have a harder job convincing the court that their failure not to have it checked has not exacerbated the problem and remedial costs. Civil law seeks reasonableness in its judgements based on case law and evidence. There must be many owners who for some reason or other don’t do many mile pa, but it’s not reasonable to lay their failure to have the caravan checked at the makers door. People have to take responsibility for their actions.

 

[Darren.H]

The role of the NCC?
I really don't care if I'm being honest.
I think confusion regarding aspects of caravans that pre Internet days nobody would have cared about has crept in and plagued peoples minds

If you enjoy caravans, appreciate the technical and comfort advancements, then surely the powers at be are doing us the end user a great service.

Currently having a weekend away in the van, l'm layed on the front bench, roof lights open as is the door, the warm smells of I think hay wafting in, sat typing this stuff, having an absolute perfect lazy Sunday, the now and again sound of a barky dog and children playing in the distance their shouts and laughter carried by the gentle breeze into the caravan, perfect!

 

[Buckman]

So if after say two years between services and damp checks a van is found to have damp and or damage the owner will have a harder job convincing the court that their failure not to have it checked has not exacerbated the problem and remedial costs.

Not sure how any one can prove that more damage resulted due to not having a service? We had our 2011 brand new Lunar Delta serviced by dealership in year one and a year later at its 2nd service there was over 60% damp around the front windows and the floor requiring extensive work to be done. The AWS stated that the damp was probably there from day one as it was a known fault around the front windows, but in our case it was so bad that it had sporead into the floor.

A year later and after its third service at the dealership again less than 3 months later there was an issue with the area around the cassette. The damage from damp was extensive and so bad that the screws or nails on the inside of the skin had rusted and the rust reacted with the aluminium skin causing pitting.

Either way having it serviced did not prevent damp or the extensive damage. BTW we were big Lunar fans until we bought the 2011 Lunar Delta. Leaky Lunar was very apt!

Thanks for the input as you learn something every day.

 

[JezzerB]

Darren H I am totally with you all the way-we've just had 11 wonderful days in ours-every time we go away in it we marvel at how relaxed we feel when we get home-and how amazing it is. I can't help but think how amazing it is compared to our house-we have curtains blinds that keep light out and insect blinds so we can see out when we open a window-without being plagued inside-at home-the flies simply enter. WE have a large fridge freezer that operates brilliant on a fuel of our choice-unlike home and is silent in operation-unlike the chooing mooing thing, we have a heating system that is the same-and we have underfloor heating that is amazingly effective even on the coldest winters night-and we can leave the heat on on low and be totally comfy and its quiet(alde). We have 4 different times/temps and water settings too and if it's really cold we can add gas to the electricity! We have an onboard tank and can both have a proper shower in quick succession without running out of hot water courtesy of the boost button, and its beautifully lit , bright and spacious. You can tell we love our caravan-we've loved all of the ones we've had but this is the best yet, we love being in it and exploring new places and I am very grateful they are as good as they are. And to cap it all the poor thing has to be dragged round the disgraceful cart tracks they call roads and manage not to fall apart. Just love what the manufacturers have achieved so far!

 

[otherclive]

Not sure how any one can prove that more damage resulted due to not having a service? We had our 2011 brand new Lunar Delta serviced by dealership in year one and a year later at its 2nd service there was over 60% damp around the front windows and the floor requiring extensive work to be done. The AWS stated that the damp was probably there from day one as it was a known fault around the front windows, but in our case it was so bad that it had sporead into the floor.

A year later and after its third service at the dealership again less than 3 months later there was an issue with the area around the cassette. The damage from damp was extensive and so bad that the screws or nails on the inside of the skin had rusted and the rust reacted with the aluminium skin causing pitting.

Either way having it serviced did not prevent damp or the extensive damage. BTW we were big Lunar fans until we bought the 2011 Lunar Delta. Leaky Lunar was very apt!

Thanks for the input as you learn something every day.

Agree that having it serviced will not prevent damp, but having it serviced iaw the schedule would strengthen your case if it came to a civil law suit.

 

[Buckman]

We have an onboard tank and can both have a proper shower in quick succession without running out of hot water courtesy of the boost button, and its beautifully lit , bright and spacious.

We can have several 10 minute hot showers one after the other and still have plenty of hot water left over.

 

[otherclive]

Agree that having it serviced will not prevent damp, but having it serviced iaw the schedule would strengthen your case if it came to a civil law suit.

PS I should say that any case under CRA 2015=would be against the seller.

 

[Dustydog]

We need to carefully differentiate between a guarantee and a water ingress warranty. Not the same.
As far as I am aware the CRA 2015 makes no reference to the manufacturers water ingress warranty or guarantee. What does matter , did the seller , ie the dealer say you must have an annual service , damp check? Of course he didn’t! Show me please someone!
So Buckman is on the right trail here. IMO damp in a newish caravan is indicative of an inherent latent defect starting from the date of production because of very simply a production defect. End of story. If you can prove an inherent latent defect the timescale is ab initio.👍👍No matter how old your caravan is.
Here we go . Cat among the pigeons.

 

[RogerL]

Ok am I being naive here-but the caravan industry does need a collective voice-if only to protect it against possilby negative legislation that might be introduced-though of course the B+E licence drop in the late 90s proved they didn't /don't have much influence perhaps-as this rule alone must have put many off buying more expensive larger vans. However the issue lies in the fact that they purport also to protecting the consumer like the SMMT -who can act as a go between between car and garage/maker complaints. Clearly they don't seem to do this. I'm not sure what their standards are re the build of a caravan -it does seem they bandy their approval meaning there are some basic electrical/ build safety standards but am still not convince d and after reading on here feel they could/should be doing a lot better but are simply paid for representatives of the caravan industry as a whole. Maybe time for another body ??

It was the influence of NCC which ensured that BE was only dropped for new licence holders - the initial proposal was that all pre-existing BE entitlements would be lost and only reinstated after taking the +E test.

 

[ProfJohnL]

I may be mistaken or misunderstanding the CRA 2015 as nowhere in the CRA 2015 is it mandatory to have an annual service for the CRA 2015 to lapse.
In essence even if you do not have an annual service if damp is found 2 years later you can probably still claim from the dealer as more than likely the damp would be due to an inherent fault and there at time of purchase.

You are confusing the issue. This has nothing to do with the CRA. The CRA only affects the retail sale of the goods to the customer and has no impact on the T&C of manufacturers warranties.

It is also the case that the manufacturers warranty does not affect a consumers rights under the CRA- they are total separate and non interactive processes.

A manufacturer can include almost any type of limitation they want on their warranty policies, and often caravan manufacturers make it an essential provision that an annual service to a set standard must be carried out to maintain the validity of their warranty. Technically its not "mandatory" but if you fail to comply the manufacturers warranty cover can be withdrawn.

 

[Ern]

🙀🙀🙀

Sorry everyone
I was rushing this morning and thought mistakenly I was responding to the Prof, Now resting on a CL overlooking the beauty of the sea on the Pembrokeshire coast with a cold beer. Oh yes! England 1, Italy 0. Bliss.