Well done Swift - now what about the rest

Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
For my sins I now help companies who wish to become or maintain accreditation to the BS EN ISO 9000 series of standards. Part of that process calls for the organisation to be customer focused, and for most organisations that has to include procedures to record and demonstrate how complaints are handled.

Traditionally a complaint has always been viewed as a negative, and it is human nature to wish to ignore such issues, but the more proactive companies actually spend considerable effort in analysing the causes behind a complaint, and turning that information into useful data to help improve the products or service. Some of the most successful companies will tell you that complaints are a very important resource that point to opportunities for improvement.

Now the Caravan manufacturers do not usually sell direct to the end user, instead they use dealers. The majority of the dealers are independent companies who are not controlled by the manufacturers, Each dealer will have their own complaints procedures so there is an organisational discontinuity between maker and user, the dealer acts as the intermediary, and to handle complaints they are usually categorised before sending information back to the manufacturer which looses some of the individual nature and importance of a users problems.

Sadly this has the effect of filtering the feedback of problems, and consequently it can appear to the end user that the manufacture is not responsive. It is also important to realise that a particular problem you have may seem major to you, but to the manufacture (when it is compared to the other issues they have to deal with) it may be given a lower priority. I do not condone that approach, but sadly it is an all too common when manufactures do not have direct customer contact.

With the introduction of web sites forums such as this one, it has probably become an eye opener to some manufactures. Customers now have a very easy way of publicising problems with products, and that is a danger of these sites. It is human nature to shout when something hurts, and that draws attention to the issue. Conversely when everything is going well we quietly get on with life. So it is the nature of these web sites that they will be very biased towards negative issues.

Most companies will not openly discuss individual problems in public, and that is probably correct, but when a groundswell of related issues raises its head, that is the time that a company should become involved in a general discussion. These forums are a good place to do that.

To their credit Swiftgroup seem to have swallowed the bullet and started to interact with forum members. This is good - we have seen Kath from Swift, become involved with a number of manufacture/customer related issues and it would appear that a resolution has resulted. Through all of this Kath's responses so far have been constructive, cooperative and measured but helpful.

What is more is that the public image of Swift group has been enhanced - hey that not bad considering the causal point was a complaint!

It is about time that the other manufacturers start to engage in these forums. They actually stand to gain quite a lot just like Swift.

What does it cost them? Well not a great deal. It is a low cost exercise but it can gain big benefits if not least improved good will, which is a tradable commodity.
 
Mar 14, 2005
175
0
0
Visit site
I was talking to the Bailey rep at the NEC about this very issue, he said they are now looking into monitoring the forums, which can only be a good thing.
 
Jun 20, 2005
17,267
3,486
50,935
Visit site
I don't believe for one minute Bailey are not watching this site daily, I know a lot of their dealers do!

I have e-mailed Kelly Watts at Bailey a number of times encouraging her and Simon Howard to follow Swift's example and actively respond on this forum. We shall see?

Come on KELLY AND SIMON AT BAILEY,it's you guys we want to hear from!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers

Alan
 
Aug 25, 2006
758
0
0
Visit site
Yes, it would be nice to have a little more interaction on here from manufacturers, but as to whether they couls actually let loose someone who could comment on many issues without referring back for the Company line, well thats another matter.

I can`t believe anyone deciding to spent 15 grand on a caravan or not would do so on the basis of a manufacturer taking part in an on-line forum!!!!!!!!
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
Hello Angus,

You make a valid point. I certainly would not encourage anyone to make their choice of caravans simply on the basis of the manufacturers participation on a forum such as this.

However if it exposes a companies procedures and it can be seen to be more amenable to resolving customer issues then that might be a stronger argument over a rival who may have a less responsive customer relations team.

No one wishes to have problems with a major purchase such as a car or a caravan, but it seems we have come to be unsurprised if something does go wrong. It may be a particular comfort to some purchaser to know that they have access to a company though a medium such as this.
 
Jan 6, 2008
939
0
0
Visit site
When any manufacture stop,s taking info from customers and there problems and idea,s they will go down the pan in a short space of time.

Just look at Bailey they had good product and after care service for years and years.

Now all you here is complaints could be they have just got to BIG or is it this new assembly line of there,s mass produced rubbish. When you build in mass you have got to have a very good inspection team. Or go back to the old way Bailey.
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
It seems that my optimism regarding Swift group may have been premature.

The thread running about aluminium window frames is clearly a straw too far.

I have praised Kath's contributions on behalf of Swiftgroup, but her posting of 29/02/2008 09:07:06 in the buyer guide to caravans has a distinctly different and unwelcome tone.

Perhaps the company has begun to get cold feet about aluminium windows, or perhaps they are looking ahead to the possibility of significant claims against them, Sadly their response on this occasion is to try to gag public debate, yet to leave the door open for individuals to correspond.

I have to agree that this sounds like corporate self protection. However I am not sure how Swift can gag Polyplastic, unless they own them.

Whatever Swift like, I am sure that the public debate will continue.
 
Feb 7, 2007
30
0
0
Visit site
It seems that my optimism regarding Swift group may have been premature.

The thread running about aluminium window frames is clearly a straw too far.

I have praised Kath's contributions on behalf of Swiftgroup, but her posting of 29/02/2008 09:07:06 in the buyer guide to caravans has a distinctly different and unwelcome tone.

Perhaps the company has begun to get cold feet about aluminium windows, or perhaps they are looking ahead to the possibility of significant claims against them, Sadly their response on this occasion is to try to gag public debate, yet to leave the door open for individuals to correspond.

I have to agree that this sounds like corporate self protection. However I am not sure how Swift can gag Polyplastic, unless they own them.

Whatever Swift like, I am sure that the public debate will continue.
I e-mailed Swift over two weeks ago asking about replacement rear lights. I specifically asked that they respond promptly as I had a deadline of the 1st March! I'm still waiting for them to respond and have had to sort out the problem myself in the meantime. Thanks Swift!!!!
 
Jun 20, 2005
17,267
3,486
50,935
Visit site
Well Said John and Julie

Julie did Swift ever get back to you?

I am surprised Kath never made contact , putting the ally windows to one side for the moment?

Cheers

Alan
 
Jan 3, 2008
13
0
0
Visit site
I just wish I had known about this forum when I was having a bit of difficulty with my Sterling van.

I turned up on the NEC stand for Swift in November last year and berated Swift about the problems with a 5 month old van but to be honest most of the problems were down to the poor attention paid by the dealer when performing the Pre Delivery inspection.

The problems that Swift were culpable for were dealt with quite quickly but had to be done via the dealer. I am 70 miles round trip to the dealer from home and based on the performance on the pre delivery I would not trust them to blow the tyres up never mind anything else.

The spare parts were sent and eventually turned up, I fitted them and all is again well.

I had a real pop at Swift about having to deal through the dealer and that was taken on board. The lady from Swift phoned about five times to check all was well and to keep me up to date on progress.

The next thing that happened was the prat who has the van next to me forgot to put the legs down and an 80 mile wind topples it against mine. To cut a long story short I needed the paint code for the van to get touch up paint.

I dropped them a note and told them to cut the cr*p about going throgh the dealer and guess what back came the info within 48 hours.

I think that the more we as owners tell them about the need for direct communications with independence from dealers the sooner we will get fair and equitable service from dealers.

Tommy
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
Hello Tom,

I am pleased that you have found Swift to be responsive to your problems, however I read into your posting that you blame the dealer for issues relating to the pre delivery inspection.

Without details I may be being unfair, but can I just ask you to think about the pre delivery inspection: When you buy a television or other piece of high tec equipment, you rightly expect it to work straight out of the box, and the dealer does not have to do a PDI. So why not caravans?

We have been told for years that cars and caravan need a Pre delivery Inspection, But this really should not be necessary if the manufacture is doing their job right. Why should dealers be checking to see that windows, doors wheels, gas, electric and water systems etc are working; those are manufacturing responsibilities and should be fully carried out at the factory

All that should be required is that the caravan/car is subject to a Pre Delivery Preparation. This should amount to the removal of manufacturing protective covers, and the fitting of any customer specified options and equipment. It should not have to include checks on the original build specification.

In practice (and I would welcome information from any manufacturer to prove otherwise) it is known by the manufacturers that the many parts that go into a caravan are not full tested and proved working before they leave the assembly plant. As a consequence they rely on the dealer to effectively complete the quality checks that should be done at the factory.

On that basis alone, PDI's should not be at the buyer's expense, they should be the total responsibility of the manufacture.

By comparison, cars are far more complex than caravans, It is interesting that the motor trade reports decreasing numbers of faults found at PDI, and so they are moving towards PDP's. If the motor trade can do it on a complex device, why not caravan manufactures on their relatively simple product.

Don't blame your Dealer for problems at PDI, The problems are created by the manufacture not completing their jobs.
 
Mar 14, 2005
1,476
1
0
Visit site
John,I agree with what you say but there was a practice going on some years ago where the dealers were getting vans from the manufacturers cheaper with the proviso that they took on all the risks of warranty works. I don't know if its still happening.
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
Hello Ray,

Back in the 1980's a number of caravan manufacturers got into financial difficulties. This impacted their production lines as some suppliers refused to make deliveries until bills had been paid. The production lines still produced caravans but many were incomplete, because of supply shortages.

These vans would be stockpiled in yards and I know that at least one manufacture had at least 500 incomplete caravans. Some were missing small items like door locks, table legs, but some had heaters and fridges missing, and some even had whole sides or roofs missing.

In an effort to complete some orders, some of the stockpiled caravans were used as donors for shortages on other models. This meant that it was almost impossible for the manufacture to know precisely what was in each of the stockpiled vans.

This was a classic scenario of a manufacture in dire financial difficulties, and it was of no great surprise when they actually went into receivership.

It is quite possible that the receivers tried to off load some of the incomplete caravans, and it might have been tempting for some dealers to take some with the view to complete them and of course sell them. Under the circumstances there would be no manufacturers guarantee or any underwriting of warranty costs by the original manufacturer that would fall entirely upon the dealer.

Given the above scenario, it does not change my position, because effectively the dealer has taken on the role of the manufacture, and so faults reaching the user are still down to uncontrolled manufacturing procedures and testing.

This is hardly surprising, as the dealers will not have closely controlled manufacturing procedures, and are generally not equipped to carry full manufacturing and testing to OEM standards.

Because of the possibility that a manufacture may also be a retailer, the SoGA refers to the 'seller' as a more general adjective term rather than more specific titles such as dealer, or retailer. This ensures that the end user still has their SOGA rights protected.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts