Jump to content

Elddis Warranty - Consequences of non compliance with T&C's


Lobster
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well Elddis warranty for damp is not worth the paper it is written on for second owners

my Van is a Compass Omega 2014

they are pushing 10 yr warranty on damp don’t believe it

purchased my van June 2015 second owner took my money to take over the warranty

now have damp in the van put in a claim but because the third service had to be done within 30 days of original purchase date not when I purchase the van they have rejected my claim ?

the van is only 4 yrs old I paid to take over the warranty 

Solid construction don’t believe it 10 yr damp warranty don’t believe it 

most manufacturers transfer warranty free to second owners

my next Van will not be a Elddis you have been warned

 

 

 

 

Edited by Grandpa Steve
Removal if inflammatory title
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might have paid to take over the warranty, but then you failed to maintain it.

Had you read the warranty conditions properly, you would have been aware of the timescales required to maintain it.

Sorry if this seems to be unsympathetic, but all manufacturers have broadly the same conditions on timescales for servicing and damp checks, not just Elddis.

Whether or not a charge is made to transfer the warranty is irrelevant.

Edited by hp100425ev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All manufacturers have conditions for warranties on the service anniversary . Some will call for the service to be done before and some service dates allow before or after the date . The 3 year service is before the anniversary usually as the components like appliances have a 3 year warranty so if there is a problem they are still under the components warranty .

 

Dave

Edited by CommanderDave
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This something of which buyers have to beware as it sounds as though the service window expired perhaps whilst on the dealers forecourt.   Manufacturers do push the 10 year damp warranty, but its only when you read the details that you find this only applies to the first purchaser, otherwise its 6 years. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, FrankBullet said:

Yes I’m afraid the terms and conditions of the warranty have not been maintained so it will be voided sadly.

Quite correct so not sure why the OP is trying to blame Elddis?  If they had bought from a dealer they would have been covered by SOGA.   One of the pitfalls of buying privately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had not realised it was a private purchase, but OP does say this

"purchased my van June 2015 second owner took my money to take over the warranty"

 

What does surprise me is OP third owner of a year old caravan?

 

Would be nice to know how much is the cost of repair and from price paid for caravan is he out of pocket having no doubt paid less than if from a dealer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, David Park said:

Had not realised it was a private purchase, but OP does say this

"purchased my van June 2015 second owner took my money to take over the warranty"

 

What does surprise me is OP third owner of a year old caravan?

 

Would be nice to know how much is the cost of repair and from price paid for caravan is he out of pocket having no doubt paid less than if from a dealer?

Hi David, I read it as the OP is the second owner and Elddis took his/her money for the warranty transfer.  Sadly a misunderstading of the small print seems the OP missed a service deadline set out in the warranty T&C’s. Hugely disapointing I am sure, but not knowing the details how missed it was makes it hard to judge if Elddis are being reasonable or could be more lenient given the circumstances.

Cheers, Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there is a service book now supplied with caravans which makes the second owner responsible to find out when the service is due and if any previous service had been carried out. I think this can be done through a dealer electronically?

No doubt I stand to be corrected.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that the system and no written record of service plan and record does Maker or Dealer not notify when a service due even to first owner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had an Xplore, and the services had to be done as follows:

 

First 2 years to be 60 days before or after of anniversary of purchasing the caravan - new from dealer

3rd year 60 days before anniversary

4th,5th,6th,7th years 60 days before or after anniversary

8th year 60 days before anniversary

 

You really need to know this.   Our dealer did inform us of this and to make sure.   Its the same with the Venus, have to look at the warranty to make sure.   But I always do the service before the anniversary, to make sure we are compliant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Babstreefern said:

We had an Xplore, and the services had to be done as follows:

 

First 2 years to be 60 days before or after of anniversary of purchasing the caravan - new from dealer

3rd year 60 days before anniversary

4th,5th,6th,7th years 60 days before or after anniversary

8th year 60 days before anniversary

 

You really need to know this.   Our dealer did inform us of this and to make sure.   Its the same with the Venus, have to look at the warranty to make sure.   But I always do the service before the anniversary, to make sure we are compliant

Yes when we got our new van in March this year, Elddis contacted me in April with the terms of the service and claiming warranty work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sparkie240 said:

I don't think there is a service book now supplied with caravans which makes the second owner responsible to find out when the service is due and if any previous service had been carried out.

 

Yes there is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Caravan warranties have more holes in than the caravans that they are supposed to protect, from reading the Elddis website they are by far the worst and should be ashamed of the rubbish that they print to draw you in as a customer. ....SOLID. ..Soiled more like.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had the same problem with my currant swift major caravan, but having done all the checks with swift I was told by swift  hard luck no warranty as the first service was 34 days overdue.   The dealer then paid for an insurance based warranty that will see out the six year period that as second owner swift would not cover.

 My first service carried out 2 weeks before due date and all is in good order, perhaps swift should have more faith in the caravans they produce.

 

kot

pigs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another sad aggrieved tale by OP.

 

FWIW . ...

When we were just about to purchase a 2. 5 year old Swift Challenger privately, £3k cheaper than with a dealer, I checked with the original supplying & servicing dealer and with Swift directly by emails the exact details and requirements to confirm in writing that it still had a valid Warranty with the Service dates properly complied with and recorded and that we could take over the Warranty as the second owners which we then did.

We then followed the Service & inspection schedules after that albeit we never chose to make a claim.

The Caravan was sold (again privately at a fair price) actually long after the build and damp warranty had expired but with a comprehensive document file which the purchaser fully appreciated (I think). 

 

I would follow the same or similar suitable procedures and due diligence with purchasing a s/h car van boat motorbike puppy etc  from Private vendors and Dealers as well.

 

I usually work on the basis that a £1 Pound Note in your pocket has some actual value but a Warranty Document's promise or an Insurance Cover's promise is merely a complicated & tricky paper document giving you the opportunity, if a valid claim occurs, to then start an argument.

Good luck !

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mark&Penny14 said:

Caravan warranties have more holes in than the caravans that they are supposed to protect, from reading the Elddis website they are by far the worst and should be ashamed of the rubbish that they print to draw you in as a customer. ....SOLID. ..Soiled more like.  

Not sure why people are fussed about warranties when they are in addition to your rights as a consumer and do not over ride legislation.   If you fail to have the caravan serviced on time in the third year and damp occurs through no fault of the consumer then the consumer may be able to claim from the dealer under CRA 2015 as it could be an inherent fault however if you take into consideration the price paid, it is obvious that the caravan is not durable under CRA 2015.   Could be an interesting conversation with a dealer trying to wiggle out of their responsibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Durbanite said:

Not sure why people are fussed about warranties when they are in addition to your rights as a consumer and do not over ride legislation.   If you fail to have the caravan serviced on time in the third year and damp occurs through no fault of the consumer then the consumer may be able to claim from the dealer under CRA 2015 as it could be an inherent fault however if you take into consideration the price paid, it is obvious that the caravan is not durable under CRA 2015.   Could be an interesting conversation with a dealer trying to wiggle out of their responsibilities.

 

Simple answer is that your consumer rights are a backstop to any warranty or guarantee you are offered, with a warranty or guarantee you don't have to drag the supplier through the courts to get a resolution.

 

The warranty/guarantee route should alway be the first path of resolution, only when they and the suppliers complaints procedure has been exhausted should you resort to the legal route.

 

You will find that if you try to circumvent the process you will be advised to go back and do it properly, especially if you try to involve the regulator out of sequence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Durbanite said:

Not sure why people are fussed about warranties when they are in addition to your rights as a consumer and do not over ride legislation.   If you fail to have the caravan serviced on time in the third year and damp occurs through no fault of the consumer then the consumer may be able to claim from the dealer under CRA 2015 as it could be an inherent fault however if you take into consideration the price paid, it is obvious that the caravan is not durable under CRA 2015.   Could be an interesting conversation with a dealer trying to wiggle out of their responsibilities.

I'm a little intrigued to know how the CRA would be easily and effectively applied after 3 years. A fault that only arises after that length of time would be hard to consider as inherent and there are no specific requirements about product durability.  The legislation is written so that any fault occurring In the first 6 months is assumed in law to have been present from the start. After 6 months it is entirely down to the purchaser to prove the fault always existed. If the previous two services didn't detect the fault the the case would be up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

In addition, after 6 months there is no ability to reject for a full refund so where would you go if the seller refuses. Of course, none of that prevents having it repaired then taking out a civil action to obtain compensation from the seller providing their liability can be proved (this is nothing to do with the CRA). In England & Wales there is a limit of 6 years from the date the cost is incurred to commence such an action.

Edited by Legal Eagle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Legal Eagle said:

I'm a little intrigued to know how the CRA would be easily and effectively applied after 3 years. A fault that only arises after that length of time would be hard to consider as inherent and there are no specific requirements about product durability.  The legislation is written so that any fault occurring In the first 6 months is assumed in law to have been present from the start. After 6 months it is entirely down to the purchaser to prove the fault always existed. If the previous two services didn't detect the fault the the case would be up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

In addition, after 6 months there is no ability to reject for a full refund so where would you go if the seller refuses. Of course, none of that prevents having it repaired then taking out a civil action to obtain compensation from the seller providing their liability can be proved (this is nothing to do with the CRA). In England & Wales there is a limit of 6 years from the date the cost is incurred to commence such an action.

I did use the words "could" and "may".  CRA 2015 does mention that the goods should be of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.    Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.  

I would think that price paid and durability are the important elements in CRA 2015  if making a claim and you have not followed the guidelines for servicing.   Servicing guidelines  are not written into legislation and neither is annual servicing although I think the element of goods kept in reasonable condition is mentioned somewhere in CRA 2015.  

Is there any proof that an annual service would prevent water ingress?  If making a claim after not following the guidelines for servicing, one would need to look at price paid and durability.   After all CRA 2015 was written to cover a very wide variety of goods and not just vehicles and trailers and some of these goods would never require servicing in the life of the product.

If you paid a large amount for goods any reasonable person would expect the goods to last several or more years without any major issues excluding wear and tear.   I would like to think that damp could possibly be an inherent fault that may take sometime to manifest itself i. e. the caravan could be on a seasonal pitch and in year 4 damp became apparent.  

If you take into consideration that the average caravan is only used for about 3 months of a year, dealers are getting away with a lot by denying consumers their rights and stating that the manufacturer is refusing to honour the warranty whether the claim is just after the initial warranty has expired i. e. in month 13 or at a later date as basically in a period of 3 years the caravan may have had less than a year's usage.    A judge would have to take all this into consideration.  

Somehow I doubt if any dealer or manufacturer would like an issue like this progress to court as it may open the floodgates for other claims which have been rejected in the past if the judge rules in favour of the consumer.

Legal Eagle your input is valued and helps broaden ones knowledge of consumer law.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Durbanite said:

Is there any proof that an annual service would prevent water ingress?  If making a claim after not following the guidelines for servicing, one would need to look at price paid and durability.  

 

The manufacturer would claim that had the caravan been serviced, a damp check would have been done and identified the water ingress.

 

The issue really is around the denial of a claim because the caravan was serviced 2 weeks outside of the time fame the manufacturer stipulates either side of the anniversary, would the damp be that much worse 2 weeks later. and I think we all know what that answer is, a couple of weeks isn't going to make  that much difference,  however a couple of months would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Grandpa Steve said:

 

The manufacturer would claim that had the caravan been serviced, a damp check would have been done and identified the water ingress.

 

The issue really is around the denial of a claim because the caravan was serviced 2 weeks outside of the time fame the manufacturer stipulates either side of the anniversary, would the damp be that much worse 2 weeks later. and I think we all know what that answer is, a couple of weeks isn't going to make  that much difference,  however a couple of months would.

There is no requirement in legislation to serviced goods annually  however a lot depends on how well the damp test was done at the service.   Unfortunately we had damp picked up around the cassette locker on our 2011 Lunar Delta TI 3 months after service.   The damp was that bad that it had rusted the screw heads which in turn affected the aluminium side of the caravan with what looked like pitted holes.

I wonder why the insistence that a service in the third year must be carried out before the anniversary date because as you state several weeks later would not make any difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Durbanite said:

I did use the words "could" and "may".  CRA 2015 does mention that the goods should be of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.    Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.  

I would think that price paid and durability are the important elements in CRA 2015  if making a claim and you have not followed the guidelines for servicing.   Servicing guidelines  are not written into legislation and neither is annual servicing although I think the element of goods kept in reasonable condition is mentioned somewhere in CRA 2015.  

Is there any proof that an annual service would prevent water ingress?  If making a claim after not following the guidelines for servicing, one would need to look at price paid and durability.   After all CRA 2015 was written to cover a very wide variety of goods and not just vehicles and trailers and some of these goods would never require servicing in the life of the product.

If you paid a large amount for goods any reasonable person would expect the goods to last several or more years without any major issues excluding wear and tear.   I would like to think that damp could possibly be an inherent fault that may take sometime to manifest itself i. e. the caravan could be on a seasonal pitch and in year 4 damp became apparent.  

If you take into consideration that the average caravan is only used for about 3 months of a year, dealers are getting away with a lot by denying consumers their rights and stating that the manufacturer is refusing to honour the warranty whether the claim is just after the initial warranty has expired i. e. in month 13 or at a later date as basically in a period of 3 years the caravan may have had less than a year's usage.    A judge would have to take all this into consideration.  

Somehow I doubt if any dealer or manufacturer would like an issue like this progress to court as it may open the floodgates for other claims which have been rejected in the past if the judge rules in favour of the consumer.

Legal Eagle your input is valued and helps broaden ones knowledge of consumer law.

 

The first hurdle would be getting it to court. Trading Standards are the statutory enforcement authority and there is no evidence that this fault has always been present. The second hurdle is the undeniable fact that warranty cover has been refused because the owner is in breach of contract in that the T&C of the warranty were not adhered to. It matters not whether a separate warranty agreement was signed. By paying the fee to have the warranty transferred is clearly an acceptance of the warranty T&C and they form a binding contract for the validity of all claims.

It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to apply the CRA after 3 years under these circumstances. Notwithstanding cost, frequency of use or any (subjective) view on expected condition after 3 years, the fact remains that in the absence of any other evidence up until now the product has been as described, in satisfactory condition and fit for it's intended purpose.  

Annual service may prevent water ingress or identify it early. How much a caravan is used, however, will have no relevance.

You are of course quite correct in that it would be the Court's final decision but it has to get there first and I very much doubt this case would and that it would be viewed, in legal terms, as a vexatious claim. Unfortunately, by oversight the service interval has been exceeded thus breaching T&C. Anger and frustration is understandabke but it is fairly and squarely the owner's responsibility to ensure compliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because a warranty sits alongside your legal rights the manufacturer can impose pretty much any conditions they choose!

If this involves setting deadlines for damp tests and servicing, so be it.

As far as legal rights are concerned, these are based on "inherent faults" and include a "reasonable" clause. Use of a defective sealant which results in a leak later but before a "reasonable" time has elapsed can be considered to be an inherent fault. However it is also reasonable for the dealer to limit his repair to the leak, if the buyer has ignored the makers advice on damp tests which would have prevented or limited subsequent damage from damp. The leak being a result of the "inherent fault" and the damp damage being due to the owner's neglect. The dealer would probably be on a sticky wicket if the damp test was only a few weeks late but on much firmer ground for a longer period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Legal Eagle said:

I'm a little intrigued to know how the CRA would be easily and effectively applied after 3 years. A fault that only arises after that length of time would be hard to consider as inherent and there are no specific requirements about product durability.  The legislation is written so that any fault occurring In the first 6 months is assumed in law to have been present from the start. After 6 months it is entirely down to the purchaser to prove the fault always existed. If the previous two services didn't detect the fault the the case would be up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

In addition, after 6 months there is no ability to reject for a full refund so where would you go if the seller refuses. Of course, none of that prevents having it repaired then taking out a civil action to obtain compensation from the seller providing their liability can be proved (this is nothing to do with the CRA). In England & Wales there is a limit of 6 years from the date the cost is incurred to commence such an action.

 

Elddis, for example, publish on their website details of how they test their caravans on a military proving ground, and they claim that after 27000 miles the van was as good as new. This provides an excellent benchmark when one is wondering about the life expectancy and durability of a caravan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...