Romahome roof problems

[barnplatt]

Firstly may I say Hi to everyone & introduce myself as a mature small motorhome enthusiast of long standing..

Following many happy adventures wild camping throughout europe in various pop-top vans, I finaly 'rinsed' our entire bank balance (and more!) on a spanking new top of the range R20 Lo Berlingo based motorhome.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing they say & with it I would not have invested a single penny of our hard earned savings on the six month old Romahome currently sitting outside my home.

Without going into volumes of text & boring the entire community with my tales of woe, suffice it to say, what I have encountered & endured at the hands of so-called respected motor home retailers beggars belief.

Despite returning the aforementioned vehicle to its point of purchase for remedial work, rainwater continues to enter the living area even with the roof closed!

 

I feel a British Rail type senario coming on here & just like their 'wrong type of leaves' on the line, just maybe my roof is being subjected to the 'wrong kind of rain' ?

 

Have contacted other owners of identical motorhomes, constructed during the same period as my own, all of which have made reference to water ingress of a similar nature.

Of paramount concern to me, is not simply the fact my protective outer roof fails to repel weather elements, but also the extreme shape distortion which has taken place, resulting in a huge concave central area.

I now have a roof line which is far from horizontal, holding many litres of rainwater..

 

Quote:

 

"The roof's main purpose is to keep out the rain, cold, or heat. It must be strong enough to with stand

high winds; sloped to shed water; and, in areas of heavy snow, it must be constructed more rigidly

to bear the extra weight.".

 

Think I have waffled on for long enough now & sincerely trust my point has been made ;-)

 

Have now rejected the vehicle, requesting a full refund & await the dealers response, which hopefuly would not include suggestions that the roof be replaced.

 

Two questions have to be asked (& responded to)..

 

(A) Is the roof design fundementaly flawed?

(B) How long would any replacement roof endure before once more becoming problematic?

 

Would love to hear from any owners of R20 Lo vehicles (2012 onward) who can give me the benefit of their own experiences..

[pepe63xnotuse]

That doesn't sound good!...

I know you've started rejection "proceedings" but it may be worth asking on these, to see what outcomes/solutions to the faults that the other owners have had... ?

 

http://romaclub.org.uk/

 

http://smallmotorhome.co.uk/

 

(..although, as you're experienced, you're probably in those clubs/on those forums anyway..)

 

It may also be worth contacting Romahome "HQ", just to establish if the issue has now been solved ?..maybe by a redesigned roof?

 

Having said all that, I wouldn't want a new roof being fitted to a brand new vehicle and I think you are right to reject it.

IF they have rectified the problem(maybe with a redesigned roof?), then they could/should replace your vehicle with a new one which has one of them already fitted! ;-)

 

Oops! Only just realised that it wasn't "brand new"..and that you don't say how long you've owned it..

Both may have some bearing on how successful your rejection will be..?..maybe..?.

[Guest Joe90]

I don't think you'll find you are able to post your experiences on here of dodgy dealers, poor customer service, or rubbish vans that the after parting with you're hard earned cash moment you're out the door you have a fight on your hands to get problems sorted.

 

The count down begins................how long before this thread gets pulled.

 

[Brian Kirby]

He did, Pepe, he said "spanking new", and that it is six months old. :-)

 

The selling dealer is where the legal onus lies, and he must rectify the fault within a reasonable time. He (broadly) has legal options to repair, replace, or refund. He must be allowed to attempt repair if that is his choice, but the repair must be competent and satisfactory - so half a gallon of silicone would not fit the bill! Should he choose either of the other two options I would expect barnplatt to be reasonably satisfied.

 

I hope the notice of rejection has been properly served by barnplatt, and composed with the advice of at least Citizen's Advice or Trading Standards, or it may merely make matters worse. Rejecting after six months, especially where the fault has previously been drawn to the dealer's attention without success, may not prove straightforward. Most dealerships will have solicitors at their disposal, who would be negligent in their duty to their client if they failed to exploit any legal deficiencies in the formulation or submission of the notice. Rejection on the ground that barnplatt has already de facto accepted the Romahome, so is not eligible to reject, would seem the highest risk.

 

I think some negotiation, also involving the manufacturer, may prove a better way to gain a satisfactory outcome. But, is there no warranty? Surely workmanship and materials are guaranteed by Romahome for at least one year? Has the dealer even advised the manufacturer of barnplatt's problem, or has Romahome already rejected a warranty claim? If so, has he said why?

 

If the problem is not a "one off" as seems the case, the manufacturer will be aware and, as Pepe suggests, may well (meaning should by now!) have a modified design that can be substituted for the original. If done properly, possibly at the factory, what would be wrong with that outcome?

 

If all the above avenues have been exhausted, by all means use the legal channels, as your attempts to obtain remedy by more reasonable means should assist your case. But heading down the legal path as what seems to be the first step, especially after having accumulated some delay, is not, IMO, likely to prove a simple as it may at first look. Could barnplatt fill in a few of the above gaps for us? It might help.

[barnplatt]

Well! well! Joe90, say what you mean why don't you?

 

No libelous slander or personal character assassinations here I'm afraid to inform you.

 

Object of my post is not to 'slag' off any dealer or individual & I think if you re-read my post, you will discover no names have been mentioned.

 

Plainly a construction or design fault (maybe both) of my vehicle renders it currently as unfit for purpose, fact not fiction!

 

Specific purpose behind this thread is to relay to others my findings & communicate with owners of R20 Lo (post 2012) who may have encountered (or be encountering) similar such difficulties.

 

'Freedom of speech' ring any bells Joe?

 

If you cannot contribute in a positive & constructive fashion Joe, then maybe it would be best to say nothing.

[barnplatt]

To clear up a couple of seemingly unanswered points, firstly may I state my vehicle is now six months old & I am the first owner, having ordered it in October 2013 at the NEC exhibition centre for 2014 delivery.

 

An ingress of water which resulted in upholstery staining was initially discovered within a matter of weeks after taking delivery of goods & naturally the supplying dealer was notified of these facts.

Vehicle was returned at my own expense to the dealers workshop facilities for inspection & remedial work at their request.

 

Returning one week later to collect the van it was my information from the workshop manager, that no leakage could be located despite the roofs fabric sidewalls having been subjected to intensive jets of pressurised water, however the 'tell-tale' fabric stains were removed with the aid of a steam cleaning procedure, but alas the marks have now returned & rainwater continues to penetrate the vans living area.

 

My dispute lies with the retailer, not the manufacturers & as my contract was with dealer (not constructor), then I would expect negotiations to be with the salesperson or dealer representative from whom my purchase was made, their task should be to undertake relevant liaison work should this be necessary.

 

But heck!...Lets get back to basics if we can please?

 

Undeniable is the fact that my vehicles roof leaks & has suffered severe distortion, aforementioned leakage issue was dismissed by the dealer as non-existant.

 

By the manufacturers own confession, my vehicles problems are not in isolation & a bad batch of silicone sealant could be the possible cause of any water ingress, although no mention has been made of the root cause behind any deformation of its the horizontal roof line.

 

Solution?....A revised roof design IMO could be the way foward for the manufacturer, but for me a redress of all monies is what's sought..

 

In the mean time may I get back to the basis of my thread & ask if there are other R20 Lo owners experiencing my current dilema?.

 

 

 

 

[pepe63xnotuse]

Brian Kirby - 2014-10-07 12:06 PM

 

He did, Pepe, he said "spanking new", and that it is six months old. :-)

Oh yes...I got into a bit of a muddle there.. :$

(..initially thinking that it was new, only to then misread the "6 months old" bit and mess it, with an edit).

 

I agree that if it was returned to "HQ" and a "New and Improved" roof were to be fitted, then that may be okay(presuming that barnplatt hasn't "gone off" the vehicle?).

I was just, mistakenly, thinking that it was/would be messed around with by some "dealer" workshop, which is possibly equipped with little more than a pop riveter and a Caulking gun... ;-)

 

Barnplatt..I think joe90 was really commenting on the way in which some threads which may name or criticise dealers , can get pulled...I don't think he was having a pop at you, ;-)

 

Edit: Oh..so Romahome are aware of the problems then and they just blame it on a dodgy batch of "silicon"?..

Water "Pooling" on the roof aside, does that explanation/ excuse seem feasible to you?(ie: does there appear to be a suspect joints/seams?..).

As previously posted you'd have a better chance of finding owners of similar vehicles, on 'sites that are dedicated to them...

[Guest Joe90]

barnplatt - 2014-10-07 12:18 PM

 

Well! well! Joe90, say what you mean why don't you?

 

No libelous slander or personal character assassinations here I'm afraid to inform you.

 

Object of my post is not to 'slag' off any dealer or individual & I think if you re-read my post, you will discover no names have been mentioned.

 

Plainly a construction or design fault (maybe both) of my vehicle renders it currently as unfit for purpose, fact not fiction!

 

Specific purpose behind this thread is to relay to others my findings & communicate with owners of R20 Lo (post 2012) who may have encountered (or be encountering) similar such difficulties.

 

'Freedom of speech' ring any bells Joe?

 

If you cannot contribute in a positive & constructive fashion Joe, then maybe it would be best to say nothing.

 

You completely misunderstood my post, I was being Ironic,

 

having had extremely poor service myself from M/home dealers, and others highlighting problems just in the last day or so soon had their posts deleted by the website moderators.............fearful of their advertising revenue no doubt. The golden rule seems to be you cannot name names on here, however justified you may feel in doing so. That's why I said, how long before this thread gets deleted, I certainly have every sympathy with your situation, and hope you get a resolution with your Romahome as per the title of your thread, which will almost certainly will flag up the moderators, just as a Dethleffs thread did a couple of days ago did.................before it was pulled from the site.

 

As for freedom of speech, others that know me no I never shy away from that.

[barnplatt]

Top man Joe!..

 

Getting umpteen reports of dealers & manufacturers closing ranks once money for goods has been securely banked & already received an email from Addabak Ltd (Romahome) requesting I return my vehicle, their email came as a direct result of a similar type thread posted with another MH forum.

 

Their offer was declined & I have received no further communications, despite inviting them to telephone me.

 

I stand by my opinion that the newly designed R20 elevating roof is in dire need of further revision & if Romahome could supply me with a new vehicle fitted with an amended (improved) roof construction I would consider the option.

 

Bet you sweet life that dealers & manufacturers alike will have some say in what gets aired about their products over the internet..

[barnplatt]

One picture can say a thousand words.. :'(

[barnplatt]

barnplatt - 2014-10-10 10:23 AM

 

One picture can say a thousand words.. :'(

 

But struggling to upload one!..

[barnplatt]

barnplatt - 2014-10-10 10:26 AM

 

barnplatt - 2014-10-10 10:23 AM

 

One picture can say a thousand words.. :'(

 

But struggling to upload one!..

 

Maybe this time?

[barnplatt]

barnplatt - 2014-10-10 10:31 AM

 

barnplatt - 2014-10-10 10:26 AM

 

barnplatt - 2014-10-10 10:23 AM

 

One picture can say a thousand words.. :'(

 

But struggling to upload one!..

 

Maybe this time?

 

Nope!

[Guest Joe90]

Perhaps you could print that out and send it to the CEO at Romahome and invite his comments.

[PJay]

As the vehicle is not fit for the purpose it was made for. I would have thought Tading Standars would be the route to go?

I do hope you get it sorted. If it where mine I would not want it back, as the water ingress must have done some damage

I know it's nice to have a brand new Motor home, but makes me wonder if second hand better option?

Having said that we bought ours NEW

 

Do let us knmow how you get on

PJay

[Brian Kirby]

barnplatt - 2014-10-07 2:24 PM.................. already received an email from Addabak Ltd (Romahome) requesting I return my vehicle, their email came as a direct result of a similar type thread posted with another MH forum.

 

Their offer was declined...................

This, I do not understand, but the ducks on the roof I do! Some roof, some duckpond!

 

The manufacturer asked you the present the van to them, presumably so that they could assess the problem. So, why decline that invitation?

 

I accept that the dealer is legally responsible, but the manufacturer is morally responsible for what he made. Besides which, you must surely have a warranty from Romahome and, based on what you say, it would seem they are willing in to act under their warranty, whereas the dealer seemingly does nothing. Did you show the dealer that e-mail? Did you ask him to action the manufacturer's request, and get the van back to him themselves?

 

There is clearly no way that you should be expected to bear the costs, or inconvenience, of that. Having seen your van, they would then presumably advise you what they would do to remedy the problem, also replacing any materials that were damp stained/damaged etc.

 

Since your dealer seems pretty well useless, I can't understand why you seem to want them to be involved. Deal direct with the manufacturer (who, after all, made the problems), and get it all sorted out direct with the only firm that has the technical expertise, facilities, and materials, to do a thorough job.

 

I appreciate that you really want to get the dealer to replace the van, or give a full refund. However, under the circumstances as you have described them to date, I think you have scant chance of achieving legal rejection. That would leave the dealer with the legal right to repair, as the other of his options. Given that possibility, I'd go for the manufacturer to repair, in preference to the chance of a dealer repair carried out with an ill grace under legal duress.

 

If you have already taken legal advice on the possibility of rejection, and the advice is that you have a good case, my apologies. If you have not done this, I really suggest you do, either through Trading Standards or Citizens Advice, ether of whom will give good general advice, and may be able to point you to solicitors specialising in consumer law. Alternatively, have you an insurance policy that includes legal services? Some home insurances, for example, have this.

 

FWIW, I also think it may be wiser to cease publicly knocking Romahome, while at the same time apparently refusing them access to your van to assess the problem for themselves. If you won't let Romahome assess, and want only that the dealer refunds you in full, or replaces your van, you may well appear to a court (which is where this presently seems to be headed), somewhat unreasonable - in that you might appear to be trying to deny your supplier his legal right to attempt repair the van to your satisfaction - especially where it seems that right could be exercised by the seller having the repairs carried out by the manufacturer under his warranty. Sorry to press the point, but unless you already have legal advice, I really think you should obtain some before going much further. However, good luck with whatever course you adopt.

[barnplatt]

Brian Kirby - 2014-10-10 5:19 PM

 

barnplatt - 2014-10-07 2:24 PM.................. already received an email from Addabak Ltd (Romahome) requesting I return my vehicle, their email came as a direct result of a similar type thread posted with another MH forum.

 

Their offer was declined...................

This, I do not understand, but the ducks on the roof I do! Some roof, some duckpond!

 

The manufacturer asked you the present the van to them, presumably so that they could assess the problem. So, why decline that invitation?

 

I accept that the dealer is legally responsible, but the manufacturer is morally responsible for what he made. Besides which, you must surely have a warranty from Romahome and, based on what you say, it would seem they are willing in to act under their warranty, whereas the dealer seemingly does nothing. Did you show the dealer that e-mail? Did you ask him to action the manufacturer's request, and get the van back to him themselves?

 

There is clearly no way that you should be expected to bear the costs, or inconvenience, of that. Having seen your van, they would then presumably advise you what they would do to remedy the problem, also replacing any materials that were damp stained/damaged etc.

 

Since your dealer seems pretty well useless, I can't understand why you seem to want them to be involved. Deal direct with the manufacturer (who, after all, made the problems), and get it all sorted out direct with the only firm that has the technical expertise, facilities, and materials, to do a thorough job.

 

I appreciate that you really want to get the dealer to replace the van, or give a full refund. However, under the circumstances as you have described them to date, I think you have scant chance of achieving legal rejection. That would leave the dealer with the legal right to repair, as the other of his options. Given that possibility, I'd go for the manufacturer to repair, in preference to the chance of a dealer repair carried out with an ill grace under legal duress.

 

If you have already taken legal advice on the possibility of rejection, and the advice is that you have a good case, my apologies. If you have not done this, I really suggest you do, either through Trading Standards or Citizens Advice, ether of whom will give good general advice, and may be able to point you to solicitors specialising in consumer law. Alternatively, have you an insurance policy that includes legal services? Some home insurances, for example, have this.

 

FWIW, I also think it may be wiser to cease publicly knocking Romahome, while at the same time apparently refusing them access to your van to assess the problem for themselves. If you won't let Romahome assess, and want only that the dealer refunds you in full, or replaces your van, you may well appear to a court (which is where this presently seems to be headed), somewhat unreasonable - in that you might appear to be trying to deny your supplier his legal right to attempt repair the van to your satisfaction - especially where it seems that right could be exercised by the seller having the repairs carried out by the manufacturer under his warranty. Sorry to press the point, but unless you already have legal advice, I really think you should obtain some before going much further. However, good luck with whatever course you adopt.

 

Brian my friend..

 

I thank you for your interest & input.

 

Without going further may I point out that both supplying dealer & manufacturer of my motorhome are one & the same (Freeborn Ltd).

 

Furthermore my vehicle has been presented at their workshops for remedial works & they have failed to correct the reported faults.

 

By default Freeborn have appointed themselves as judge & jury in this situation whilst they pass the buck between themselves internaly.

 

Romahome UK equates to Freeborn UK & this means by default I have given the manufacturers an oppertunity to make amends.

 

I continue to believe that my vehicle is unfit for purpose & will therefore persue with vigor my right to a full refund & not a "sticking plaster" repair of a product clearly flawed..

 

Barnplatt (Mr)

[Rayjsj]

barnplatt - 2014-10-10 8:03 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2014-10-10 5:19 PM

 

barnplatt - 2014-10-07 2:24 PM.................. already received an email from Addabak Ltd (Romahome) requesting I return my vehicle, their email came as a direct result of a similar type thread posted with another MH forum.

 

Their offer was declined...................

This, I do not understand, but the ducks on the roof I do! Some roof, some duckpond!

 

The manufacturer asked you the present the van to them, presumably so that they could assess the problem. So, why decline that invitation?

 

I accept that the dealer is legally responsible, but the manufacturer is morally responsible for what he made. Besides which, you must surely have a warranty from Romahome and, based on what you say, it would seem they are willing in to act under their warranty, whereas the dealer seemingly does nothing. Did you show the dealer that e-mail? Did you ask him to action the manufacturer's request, and get the van back to him themselves?

 

There is clearly no way that you should be expected to bear the costs, or inconvenience, of that. Having seen your van, they would then presumably advise you what they would do to remedy the problem, also replacing any materials that were damp stained/damaged etc.

 

Since your dealer seems pretty well useless, I can't understand why you seem to want them to be involved. Deal direct with the manufacturer (who, after all, made the problems), and get it all sorted out direct with the only firm that has the technical expertise, facilities, and materials, to do a thorough job.

 

I appreciate that you really want to get the dealer to replace the van, or give a full refund. However, under the circumstances as you have described them to date, I think you have scant chance of achieving legal rejection. That would leave the dealer with the legal right to repair, as the other of his options. Given that possibility, I'd go for the manufacturer to repair, in preference to the chance of a dealer repair carried out with an ill grace under legal duress.

 

If you have already taken legal advice on the possibility of rejection, and the advice is that you have a good case, my apologies. If you have not done this, I really suggest you do, either through Trading Standards or Citizens Advice, ether of whom will give good general advice, and may be able to point you to solicitors specialising in consumer law. Alternatively, have you an insurance policy that includes legal services? Some home insurances, for example, have this.

 

FWIW, I also think it may be wiser to cease publicly knocking Romahome, while at the same time apparently refusing them access to your van to assess the problem for themselves. If you won't let Romahome assess, and want only that the dealer refunds you in full, or replaces your van, you may well appear to a court (which is where this presently seems to be headed), somewhat unreasonable - in that you might appear to be trying to deny your supplier his legal right to attempt repair the van to your satisfaction - especially where it seems that right could be exercised by the seller having the repairs carried out by the manufacturer under his warranty. Sorry to press the point, but unless you already have legal advice, I really think you should obtain some before going much further. However, good luck with whatever course you adopt.

 

Brian my friend..

 

I thank you for your interest & input.

 

Without going further may I point out that both supplying dealer & manufacturer of my motorhome are one & the same (Freeborn Ltd).

 

Furthermore my vehicle has been presented at their workshops for remedial works & they have failed to correct the reported faults.

 

By default Freeborn have appointed themselves as judge & jury in this situation whilst they pass the buck between themselves internaly.

 

Romahome UK equates to Freeborn UK & this means by default I have given the manufacturers an oppertunity to make amends.

 

I continue to believe that my vehicle is unfit for purpose & will therefore persue with vigor my right to a full refund & not a "sticking plaster" repair of a product clearly flawed..

 

Barnplatt (Mr)

 

Just an Observer's opinion here: This is the first case I have seen on this forum with somone having a problem with a Romahome ( ok they are not Huge sellers, but still ?) have they changed Something ?? It was stated 'a new' roof design ? the R20 lowline has been about for many years, WHY have they changed the'Proven' Roof design now ? I notice that New Romahomes are not listed in the 'New Motorhomes listings' any more ? why? whatever happened to the R40,R30,R25 ? are they now ONLY sold through this ONE dealer/maker ? I speak to many owners of differant vans on site, all of the ones with Romahomes seem to sing it's praises. All this seems to point to 'problems' within Romahome ?? and whatever has changed ? are they still made on the Isle of Wight ?

More to this than meets the eye. (?) Ray

[Keithl]

Well it appears that Romahome are still alive and kicking...

 

http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/Motorhomes/News/New-models/Romahome-demountable-returns-brand-to-its-roots/_ch1_nw3524_pg1

 

And to quote from the article...

 

"Addabak took over manufacture of Romahome models under contract with Brian (Bailey) as liaison between the factory and Freeborn Motorhomes, owners of the Romahome brand."

 

“The D20 is a perfect complement to the Romahome R10, R20, and R30 models, which continue to perform well with full order books.”

 

Mr Barnplatt,

 

Why not post your photo as a comment to the article?

 

Keith.

[Brian Kirby]

Freeborn Group claim to own Romahome, Freeborn Garages Ltd, and Island Plastics. Andrew Kenneth Jones, according to Freeborn Garages Ltd of Southampton's website, is Group Managing Director.

 

According to UK Company Director Search, Andrew Kenneth Jones seems to have a somewhat interesting track record.

 

Previously director at Elfords of New Milton Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Faston Associates Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Island Plastics International Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Saleschange Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Tool Purchase (Southampton) Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Interesting career.

 

Presently also director at S E Thomas Ltd, (Active).

 

I have no experience of such appointments, but there does seem to me an interesting tendency for companies at which he had held directorships a) to have been dissolved, and b) to be Southampton based. Small worlds?

[barnplatt]

Brian Kirby - 2014-10-10 10:53 PM

 

Freeborn Group claim to own Romahome, Freeborn Garages Ltd, and Island Plastics. Andrew Kenneth Jones, according to Freeborn Garages Ltd of Southampton's website, is Group Managing Director.

 

According to UK Company Director Search, Andrew Kenneth Jones seems to have a somewhat interesting track record.

 

Previously director at Elfords of New Milton Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Faston Associates Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Island Plastics International Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Saleschange Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Tool Purchase (Southampton) Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Interesting career.

 

Presently also director at S E Thomas Ltd, (Active).

 

I have no experience of such appointments, but there does seem to me an interesting tendency for companies at which he had held directorships a) to have been dissolved, and b) to be Southampton based. Small worlds?

 

As an observation, I wonder how long it will be before we read :

 

Previously director at Freeborn garages Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

[PCC]

I can see that the pooling on the roof looks disturbing, but is it relevant to your problem? Romahome's previous incarnation of Island Plastics was a reputable manufacturer of boat hulls so they should know a thing or two about moulding glass fibre.

 

Is the problem a leak through the roof or is it a leak at the base of the fabric sides where they will be sealed with some type of silicone sealant?

 

As far as Romahome disappearing from the listings I seem to recall that they (along with some other converters using the Berlingo) had issues with new rules for European Type Approval and the interaction of motorhome bodies with the ESP system. Or something like that.

 

I hope you get your problem sorted. I've always had a bit of a soft spot for Romahome.

 

Peter

[Brian Kirby]

barnplatt - 2014-10-11 8:19 AM

 

Brian Kirby - 2014-10-10 10:53 PM

 

Freeborn Group claim to own Romahome, Freeborn Garages Ltd, and Island Plastics. Andrew Kenneth Jones, according to Freeborn Garages Ltd of Southampton's website, is Group Managing Director.

 

According to UK Company Director Search, Andrew Kenneth Jones seems to have a somewhat interesting track record.

 

Previously director at Elfords of New Milton Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Faston Associates Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Island Plastics International Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Saleschange Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Previously director at Tool Purchase (Southampton) Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

 

Interesting career.

 

Presently also director at S E Thomas Ltd, (Active).

 

I have no experience of such appointments, but there does seem to me an interesting tendency for companies at which he had held directorships a) to have been dissolved, and b) to be Southampton based. Small worlds?

 

As an observation, I wonder how long it will be before we read :

 

Previously director at Freeborn garages Ltd, Southampton, (Dissolved) from which he resigned.

Well, that was kind of going through my mind, which is why I posted. Particularly in view of his association with Island Plastics who, if memory serves, originally made Romahomes. Of course, it may just be bad luck on his part. I assume dissolved means that the company ceased trading while solvent, so they presumably didn't go into liquidation or bankruptcy, but the brief information that is freely available doesn't give any clues as to where the company assets went. Neither does it state what stake, if any, the MD presently holds, or held in the other companies - I think these are all private companies with private shareholders. However, it did strike me as somewhat odd. Hope it proves useful to you.

[barnplatt]

PCC - 2014-10-11 9:50 AM

 

I can see that the pooling on the roof looks disturbing, but is it relevant to your problem? Romahome's previous incarnation of Island Plastics was a reputable manufacturer of boat hulls so they should know a thing or two about moulding glass fibre.

 

 

Peter

 

I have multiple causes for concern with my vehicles roof Peter & water ingress is not related to its misshapen outer horizontal profile.

 

However, if left untreated the roofs reservoir of rainwater could further aggravate matters should the weight of fluid pooling within it cause a fracture.

 

"Yes" Peter, the problem is a leak through the fabric sidewalls & one of several possible causes could well be the silicone sealant used to bond vinyl fabric to body construction.

 

I note you make reference to the production of boat hulls by Romhome's previous incarnation in the past tense, which does ask the question "Why did they cease trading when located on an island where demand for such a product must have been plentiful, lucrative & simplistic in comparison to motorhome construction?".

 

"New" Berlingo chassis cab based conversions have actualy been declared as obsolete owing to the fact all new vans sold in the EU from 31 October 2014 will have to have Electronic Stability Programme (ESP) as a standard fitment.

 

R20 Lo in its current "New" design guise would seem to be a thorne in the side for Romahome & as stated many times before within this thread, my previous 2009 Romahome R20 Lo was a pleasure to own.

[barnplatt]

Time for an update I feel ;-)

 

Since starting this thread, I have pretty much struggled against a wall of corporate men in suits, all of whom bar none insisting I have no rights to reject my vehicle :-(

Managing director of Freeborn/Romahome UK Ltd refused to even acknowledge receipt of my rejection letter, but instead the paperwork was passed it directly to his legal team.

 

In correspondence received from legal advisors of the dealer from whom my purchase was made, it is their insistance that under section 35 of the Sale of Goods Act I am not entitled to reject goods, owing to the fact I accepted the vehicle at its point of sale & have used it for six months.

 

Really do not recall the salesman pointing out any aforementioned "acceptance" clause prior to my payment being made, or indeed suggesting I scrutinised part or section of any contract documentation which made reference of the "said constraint" relative to my rights of financial/legal redress at any later date. Mis-sold maybe?

 

Since receiving correspondence from the dealers legal advisers, with great reluctance & feeling pressurised I have waved a white flag, consenting to allow manufacturers a second bite of the cherry & commence repair work on my six month old vehicle, albeit without prejudice, further stating the following 'reasonable' proviso.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I am offering yourselves as owners of the brand name Romahome & Addabak Ltd (constructors) another opportunity to supply me with goods as ordered & fit for their intended purpose. Any further suggestion by vehicle manufacturers or Freeborn Ltd, that previously 'failed' repairs be re-attempted at a later date will be treated as unreasonable & therefore declined.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Van has now effectively gone to the 'menders' & I have been told it will return fault-free in three weeks time.

 

Thanks to this forum & other similar ones I have managed to compare notes with many R20 Lo owners suffering identical roof problems to my own, including one gentleman who's two year old vehicle is now on its third set of roof canvas, yet still leaks!