30 Day Defence Against Motorhome Lemons? (1 Viewer)

[Jim]

I've been working on some content to fill a new front portal for motorhomefun. I wrote an article today that I know many of you will find interesting. The New 30 Day Reject Rule. It comes into force this October and might ensure those motorhome dealer pre-delivery-inspections actually get done Broken Link Removed

 

[Puddleduck]

Great work. Thank you.

 

[Jim]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted

22Time limit for short-term right to reject
(4) applies) is the end of 30 days beginning with the first day after these have all happened—

(3) and (4) do not prevent the consumer exercising the short-term right to reject before something mentioned in subsection (3)(a), (b) or (c) has happened.

(3) or (4) stops running for the length of the waiting period.

(7)If goods supplied by the trader in response to that request or agreement do not conform to the contract, the time limit for exercising the short-term right to reject is then either—

(a)7 days after the waiting period ends, or

(b)if later, the original time limit for exercising that right, extended by the waiting period.

(8)The waiting period—

(a)begins with the day the consumer requests or agrees to the repair or replacement of the goods, and

(b)ends with the day on which the consumer receives goods supplied by the trader in response to the request or agreement.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[peterc10]

Jim, I have looked through the legislation quickly and cannot find out whether this applies only to new goods, or does it apply to second hand ones as well.

 

[Fletton]

And I thought it was some sort of protection against "bitter" n' twisted folk joining the Funster forums.. Ha!..

 

[Jim]

From what I can see it is all goods new and second-hand, (even digital goods, like ebooks) and sold by a trader. Private sales hinge upon being as described.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[carolyn]

Wish that had been in place in March as we would have got a refund, instead we are still fighting to get things done, the latest is the aircon, Vanbitz told us it wasn't working last week, today we were told by Fiat professional that although there is a unit it hasn't been connected, part has to come from Italy. So clearly not checked by Fiat commercial, IH or Nickwhale. Thank you Jim as we will be better prepared next time!

 

[swanseajack13]

JIM about time to lets hope they enforce this rule, sunny in Swansea lol still lol ray

 

[Lizi]

So presumably this should cover payload too?? Something is not fit for purpose if you tell the dealer it needs to transport two of you plus bikes etc and then you get to the weighbridge and are overweight before you put in clothes etc.
I cannot believe that dealers are not legally obliged to weigh the van as sold and indicate the current payload with any awnings etc fitted. I am new to motorhoming and I must say this has come as something of a shock. I spoke to someone at the place you phone to get things uprated about a particular motorhome (can't remember the name of the company but heard about it on the forum - he was so helpful). But he did say he gets people contacting him who cannot use their van because the payload is so low.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[eddie]

Wish that had been in place in March as we would have got a refund, instead we are still fighting to get things done, the latest is the aircon, Vanbitz told us it wasn't working last week, today we were told by Fiat professional that although there is a unit it hasn't been connected, part has to come from Italy. So clearly not checked by Fiat commercial, IH or Nickwhale. Thank you Jim as we will be better prepared next time!

We check It is amazing though that these things can happen. Actually its appalling

 

[eddie]

From what I can see it is all goods new and second-hand, (even digital goods, like ebooks) and sold by a trader. Private sales hinge upon being as described.

That's going to open a few eyes lol The number of times you read that people have a problem with some thing so flog it!

 

[mariner]

All very well on paper but if the dealer refuses to accept the rejected goods back, what then?

I would imagine, on high net worth goods, things will not change much, the dealer will refuse a refund and will insist that repairs be carried out, just as they do now.

Eventually it will all go to court or the customer will give up, much as they do now.

As with all legislation, if it's not Policed, then it's not worth the paper it's written on.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jollyrodger]

will be good to some ,if it works only time will tell

 

[Langtoftlad]

Well retailers seem to accept the Distance Selling Regulations & banks accept (just) Section 75, so I expect most reputable dealers/retailers will have to find a way.

 

[Welsh girl]

This is good news as a few years ago we could have used it and not lost £12000 on a van due to finding damp after 3 months.
As to the payload, a lot of dealers don't even know themselves. A couple of them after asking have gone to find out or nor even contacted me back.
The latest one we looked at had a 295 payload, miniscule, and wouldn't have suited us, the dealer didn't tell us even though we were very interested in the van. We did sone research, told him our findings and he nodded as if to agree that it wasn't enough.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[voyagerstan]

LIt does realy amaze me that people will spend tens of thousands of pounds without doing reserch and knowing all the pitfalls any amount of legislation will not alter this . The old saying about afool and his money comes to mind . STAN

 

[thebriars]

All very well on paper but if the dealer refuses to accept the rejected goods back, what then?

I would imagine, on high net worth goods, things will not change much, the dealer will refuse a refund and will insist that repairs be carried out, just as they do now.

Eventually it will all go to court or the customer will give up, much as they do now.

As with all legislation, if it's not Policed, then it's not worth the paper it's written on.

Having been through the process of rejecting a new caravan, the data provided here is far from complete. There is no actual time limit for rejecting goods if they are not fit for purpose. However that time limit has to be reasonable in relation to the life expectancy of the goods, which becomes a grey area. In my case Elddis dropped themselves right in it by publishing how they tested their caravans on a proving ground over potholes etc for 27,000 miles, and the caravan was as good as new at the end. My caravan had done 1300 miles in 6 months.

AFTER the 30 day period the dealer has the right to repair/replace the goods, provided the repair costs are reasonable compared to the new cost - another grey area, although the CRA states the consumer should not be significantly inconvenienced. Thus it would be arguable that a return to the factory taking several months over the summer season could be taken as significant inconvenience. Otherwise the consumer could ask for a price reduction.

Here is the crucial bit. The dealer is only allowed one repair. After this, if the fault is still there/comes back or there are more faults that make the goods unfit for purpose the consumer can exercise their final right of rejection. There is no time limit on this, but in the case of most goods (including caravans) if the goods are under 6 months old, the consumer can get a full refund. The one exception to this is anything classed as a motor vehicle i.e. a motorhome, and then a deduction for use (not the depreciation figure) can be made. Obviously at this point the faults have to add up to make the goods unfit for purpose. It's no use rejecting the motorhome at this point just because a cupboard door catch failed.

Hopefully, a formal letter to the dealer will get a response, and at least a discussion. However, my dealer first wanted an Elddis engineer to look at the caravan, which of course I allowed. After that the dealer refused to respond at all to any letters, phone calls or visits. Then the only recourse was legal action.

A word of advice here! Make sure you somewhere have legal aid cover which will cover this sort of eventuality. If the goods are on finance, then the finance company will do the dirty work for you. Otherwise you will need to put the matter in the hands of a good solicitor. First however, take as much legal advice as possible. Citizen's Advice, CMC, house insurance cover etc. Citizen's Advice were good up to a point, but they did not know enough specific detail to be really useful. The CMC legal advice was hopeless, and ill informed. In the end I started off with the free legal advice that went with my house insurance Aviva, and they were excellent. I had a young lady who gave very clear advice, and said that as I had legal cover, it would almost certainly be covered under that. My first task was to send the dealer a final demand for a refund with a time limit. This time limit passed without any form of defence. Then it was passed to my legal aid, who confirmed I had a good case, and the dealer had enough money in the bank to give a refund.

After an appallingly childish response from the dealer to the solicitor, my solicitor (a specialist in these matters appointed by the legal aid cover) pressed them to engage their solicitor, and offered a quick settlement fee to avoid the expense of court proceedings. Eventually this was agreed and a contract was signed. From the date of the final right of rejection letter to the dealer to the settlement took a further 6 months, so one has to be persistent but patient.

At the end of the day the CRA is a brilliant piece of legislation and very readable (its written in plain English). To answer Mariner's point, it has changed things and will continue to do so if people recognise how powerful it is. Given the way my dealer behaved, I suspect most people are far too easily fobbed off.

 

[Jim]

@thebriars how about leaving the dealer a review here It only takes a couple of click. Thanks in advance

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[thebriars]

Still waiting for the actual money to come through (should be this week), but love to once that is settled. People need to be aware just how this large dealership treats its customers when things go wrong. Even the PDI and handover were dreadful. Mine was a really clear case for rejection with so many significant faults on it.

 

[Nicepix]

I'm just going through this procedure now. We've had a S/H van for 7 months and have not had the use of it for the last 5 months due to a fault that the dealer cannot seem to repair. I have done all the formalities and am now awaiting the lawyers appointed by our vehicle insurers to serve notice on them. I had hoped that they would agree to a refund without all the hassle of courts, etc.

From what I gather, EU wide there is a 2 year period where any hidden faults, i.e. faults that occur during use, can trigger the rejection process. As has been said; getting the dealer to accept this is another matter, but legally it can be done.

 

[Wh05apk]

I'm just going through this procedure now. We've had a S/H van for 7 months and have not had the use of it for the last 5 months due to a fault that the dealer cannot seem to repair. I have done all the formalities and am now awaiting the lawyers appointed by our vehicle insurers to serve notice on them. I had hoped that they would agree to a refund without all the hassle of courts, etc.

From what I gather, EU wide there is a 2 year period where any hidden faults, i.e. faults that occur during use, can trigger the rejection process. As has been said; getting the dealer to accept this is another matter, but legally it can be done.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Wh05apk]

Nicepix, do you have any link to the 2 year part?

Our van was 14 months when we found a serious structural fault, we are taking it into a repairers appointed by the manufacturer's tomorrow, but to be honest with the issue I don't want the van back, we were looking to part ex it and take a hit, this could change things.....

 

[thebriars]

Nicepix, do you have any link to the 2 year part?

Our van was 14 months when we found a serious structural fault, we are taking it into a repairers appointed by the manufacturer's tomorrow, but to be honest with the issue I don't want the van back, we were looking to part ex it and take a hit, this could change things.....

There definitely is no time limit as I said above. If they want to proceed with the repair you will probably have to go along with it if it is the first, although there is the issue of significant inconvenience in the CRA and they might agree to a replacement or a price reduction, after which you could then sell it. Its worth pushing the significant inconvenience aspect.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 is here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents

 

[Nicepix]

Nicepix, do you have any link to the 2 year part?

Our van was 14 months when we found a serious structural fault, we are taking it into a repairers appointed by the manufacturer's tomorrow, but to be honest with the issue I don't want the van back, we were looking to part ex it and take a hit, this could change things.....

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm

From what I have read; in the circumstances you describe you are entitled to a full refund if you choose not to accept a repair or partial refund. Probably best to contact the Consumer rights Department in the area where the dealer is based. They will need the dealer's name and address and also they may ask for a scanned copy of the receipt or invoice and any correspondence between you.

Best of luck

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Blue Knight]

You just have to look at the recent case involving an Autotrail Apache 634 which was rejected immediately after its 2nd hab check i.e. at the two year point of ownership.

As the story goes: The Apache was found to have water ingress levels of 90% (left side), 80% (right side) and 90% (garage) when it was checked during its first hab check. It subsequently went off to Grimsby for a full repair and was returned to the owner a few weeks later.

The owner then had his second hab check done at the 24-month point only to find damp levels of 50%, 40% and 100% to the areas which had been previously fixed by Autotrail.

The owner then rejected the vehicle and in September of this year he won his rejection case and a full refund/exchange was awarded (I can't recall which one was awarded so I will need to read the case again).

 

[thebriars]

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm

From what I have read; in the circumstances you describe you are entitled to a full refund if you choose not to accept a repair or partial refund. Probably best to contact the Consumer rights Department in the area where the dealer is based. They will need the dealer's name and address and also they may ask for a scanned copy of the receipt or invoice and any correspondence between you.

Best of luck

The Consumer Rights Act is far more embracing than this EU shopping guarantee, and provides far better statutory rights for us in the UK. There is no such thing as a consumer rights department in the UK. The place to go is Citizen's Rights. You also have to go through them if you wish to complain to Trading Standards.

Incidentally, if goods are under 6 months old, it is down to the dealer to prove that you have damaged the goods, say through mis-handling. Over 6 months and you may have to prove that you haven't mis-handled the goods. With my caravan, when they found the microwave cupboard coming loose, they said that was consistent with going over a pothole. As this happened under 6 months old, the dealer would have to prove this. However, in any case as I said above, the manufacturer claims on their website that the vehicle would stand protracted mis-use such as driving over potholes. Its worth gathering such evidence when it can be found and pointing it out in your letter of rejection.

 

[Nicepix]

The Consumer Rights Act is far more embracing than this EU shopping guarantee, and provides far better statutory rights for us in the UK. There is no such thing as a consumer rights department in the UK. The place to go is Citizen's Rights. You also have to go through them if you wish to complain to Trading Standards.

Incidentally, if goods are under 6 months old, it is down to the dealer to prove that you have damaged the goods, say through mis-handling. Over 6 months and you may have to prove that you haven't mis-handled the goods. With my caravan, when they found the microwave cupboard coming loose, they said that was consistent with going over a pothole. As this happened under 6 months old, the dealer would have to prove this. However, in any case as I said above, the manufacturer claims on their website that the vehicle would stand protracted mis-use such as driving over potholes. Its worth gathering such evidence when it can be found and pointing it out in your letter of rejection.

Yes, you are right. I should have said Trading Standards. My error. The reason I posted the European article is that it shows the 2 year period that I had previously mentioned and wh05apk asked for. That 2 years is the maximum period for that EU legislation. The European rights are the minimum that consumers should expect within the EU and as you say, some countries including the UK and in France where I am, have superior policies.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}