Jump to content

Swift damp issues


Auntypram

Recommended Posts

I wonder if anyone can help us. We are in dispute with Swift re the non sealing of side skirts when under construction of our 680fb Bolero (2006/2007)and the subsequent rot. They will not pay anything towards the cost of the repairs but have offered us a paltry sum cheque as a goodwill gesture!!

 

Does anyone out there know about Swift's assertion that they informed Dealers in 2012 about the problem and to look out for them and report back to Swift?

 

We have contacted some big dealers and they say that they know nothing about this, but, we think as they are Swift dealers, this might go against them in some way.

 

The van was repaired by a large Swift dealership and we have had confirmation that this was a big problem with these vehicles during construction but that they only found out about it lately, as we did.

 

They also found another build defect when checking for more damp in the vehicle. This was severe cracking around the Heiki rooflight due to a strut not being fixed in place to reduce the movement of opening and closing, hence the cracking (another bolero, younger than ours, was in for the same problem). Swift will not accept this as a build defect, but were shown this by the actual people working on the van (and have photographs from them of both sets of damage).

 

We have had the van's habitation checks carried out by supposedly qualified people but they haven't found any problems with damp/rot according to their paperwork. When the van was purchased in 2014 it came with a clean bill of health.

 

If any dealership or Motorhome sales can let us know, or members of the public, we would appreciate it very much.

 

Thanks for reading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if the Swift owners forum is still up and running, your contract is with the dealer who should be responsible for selling something that is fit for purpose as are whoever carried out the habitation checks as it is unlikely for that amount of damp to have got that serious in less than a year, unless the fabric of the van has been damaged. If you paid any part of the purchase price of the van or hab checks, your credit card company can be jointly libel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There’s a good deal of on-line references to Swift motorhome rotting floors

 

https://tinyurl.com/y7cxnsyq

 

and (in 2014) when I looking to sell my Hobby motorhome, it became evident that the motorhome trade was aware of problems with rot in Swift motorhome floors.

 

The Swift Owners Club forum can no longer be posted to

 

http://www.swift-owners-club.com/phpbb/

 

but “Swift Talk” can be used instead

 

https://www.swift-talk.co.uk/forum

 

and, if Swift did warn their dealerships on 2012 that there was a potential construction problem, there’s a fair chance that someone on Swift Talk will know about this.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

I would suggest that all Swift dealers were aware of the problem from around 2008 as all rotting floor repairs had to go through the dealer first with an inspection and photos

We had our Swift repaired in 2009 and had to wait for our slot at the Swift factory as they were booked up for weeks in advance for these floor repairs

The only vans affected (so say Swift)had a plastic membrane on the underside of the ply floor which trapped the water seeping down between the inefective seal between the side and floor joint

The repair is to remove the membrane and the rotted area around the perimiter of the van floor and replace with new insulation and ply then treat the undrside with a black preservative

Most dealers will not check the underside of the van floor when damp testing (so I am advised) you need to check on your damp report and check if there is a reading for the underside

Swift paid for all our costs and repairs including car hire

Ray

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You say the van came with a clean bill of health in 2014. Was it bought from a Swift dealer, and was that bill of health provided by them, or merely passed on from A N Other?

 

I think your present problem is that you are shooting at a target you can't, in effect, hit. You have no contract with Swift, only with the dealer you bought the van from. It should, therefore, be an advantage to you if you bought from a Swift dealer, because they will have little to no excuse for being unaware of the rot problem which, as suggested above, is a well known defect.

 

I'd drop your dispute with Swift and go for the selling dealer. It may seem unjust, as the dealer didn't make the van, but that is where your contract lies, and it is how consumer legislation works.

 

If you haven't already done this, get to see Trading Standards or Citizen's Advice for initial advice on where you stand legally. You'll need your sale contract, your records of inspections, and that famous bill of health. You will probably have no joy against those who carried out earlier damp checks, as you didn't pay all the bills, but against any who have carried out damp checks since you bought the van (if not the selling dealer), might also be liable for certifying a manifestly wet van as dry.

 

I would also suggest you look through all your insurances, including household, to see if any provide a legal advisory service, or even better a legal representation service. Many now do.

 

You'll need to tread with care vis a vis the dealer, as it is necessary to write formally, and you need to do this in the correct way to ensure your case is as strong as can be. Once the dealer knows he is on the receiving end of court proceedings he should change his tune, or even start putting pressure on Swift to make amends. If you speak to them in the meantime, keep notes of who to, when (date/time) and what they say. Above all, don't shout, however difficult! :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thank you all for your replies.

 

It was purchased from a dealer who has now sold the business and it has been renamed as a limited company so no come back, this also goes for the workshop that did the habitation checks. We have an on going problem with the certified workshop who has carried out our habitation checks and denies any knowledge of damp even though it is ticked on the box on the forms. He repaired some damp caused by the leak on the pipe leading from the bathroom (we have been informed that this is another build problem; that cost over £1000) he said that from now on he would check the underside (but now denies saying that). If he had been doing his job properly this damp problem would have been discovered in 2015.

 

We were told by the company that did the repairs on the floor that this is a build fault and they have been to the factory and seen the jigs they have built to deal with this. But we did not find out about this damp issue until last year when going under the van to check something and the rotten floor was found. We then had it checked and had a damp report. They called to ask us to come and see the damage caused by the damp and gave us photographs (that we sent to Swift with our first letter) because they were appalled at the damage. They also found another problem, that they showed us while we were there, with the cracking around the Heiki rooflight that didn't have the strengthener attached to it - it was just floating free above the roof board so every time the roof was opened and closed it was stressing the roof hence the cracking. There was another vehicle in at the same time as ours with the same problem. They had actually repaired a few others.

 

We are in contact with Swift who refuse to take any responsibility for the build and rot even though they have paid for the repairs to others (so we have found out on various forums)!!! and we are now on the last letter before seeking legal advice (we have cover for this). They told us that they informed the Swift dealers of this problem but not the public which we find utterly unbelievable. They also say that it is now out of warranty! They have offered us £670 as a goodwill gesture.

 

We don't know if we can recover from the credit card company (we always pay for big items over £100 with a credit card as you have more comeback). This is our another next step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a very unfortunate and worrying situation for you and, for what it is worth, you have my sympathy.

 

As both of the companies with whom you dealt have ceased trading, my advice is to get in touch as quickly as you can with Trading Standards or Citizen's Advice as I originally suggested, and see what they can say about how to proceed.

 

It is interesting that Swift have made you an offer. I hope that offer is in writing, though I suspect that it will be a "without prejudice" or similar offer intended to deny liability. However, it is indicative of some acceptance of responsibility.

 

I can't see how you will be able to avoid some cost, if only on the basis that the van is now several years old and has given service over that time.

 

It sounds as though the best solution would be for Swift to undertake the repairs themselves, but that you may have to agree to bear some of the cost. If they are serious about customer service, they should undertake the repairs at cost on the basis that the fault is an acknowledged design or construction defect that is well known in the trade.

 

I seem to remember that there is a route for a buyer to proceed against a manufacturer under EU consumer protection regulations, but I don't know whether this was merely discussed, or was formalised, or under what circumstances it might apply.

 

I think you're going to need the services of a genuine specialist in consumer law on your side, with your legal protection insurance in full support of your case.

 

All I can add is that time is now of the essence, particularly with Brexit coming down the track, if the relevant legislation is from the EU. I think you now need to go to the next level as quickly as possible. Good luck, and do keep us informed how it proceeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...