Jump to content

AEG Motorhomes, Stourbridge – rejection advice please.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1185 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then


Please click the "Report " link


at the bottom of one of the posts.


If you want to post a new story then


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

I purchased a 15 month old 2017 Swift Escape 685 motorhome for 46k in August 2018 which developed various faults, initially minor but getting more serious/worrying over the short time I've owned this.


This is my first ever motorhome and my wife and I purchased this for trips to maintain our holiday home business throughout the year, not just for holidays, the dealer was made aware of this before our purchase.

We decided to purchase a used model because we believed it would have had any initial teething problems solved, so would be more reliable than a new model, my first mistake!


I believe I now have the right to reject this motorhome under the consumer rights act 2015, but I wanted to ask you if I am right in my belief?



I'll list below the initial issues which accurred between August 2018 and October 2018:


* Rear bed broken/collapsed - Repaired by myself as I found this the night before our first use.


* Vibration from torn exhaust shield - Removed by myself for safety reasons, advised by dealer no need to replace.


* Skylight rattling/banging in wind - Rubber seal fitted by dealer to tighten fit.


* Various cupboard doors needed adjustment/replacement of rubber bump stops - Repaired by myself.


* Various window catch's out of adjustment - Packed and adjusted by dealer.


* Emergency tyre repair kit missing - Replaced by dealer.


* Storage cupboard cup and plate holder racks missing - replaced by dealer.


* Wheel alignment/tracking out of adjustment, vehicle pulling to the left - Readjusted by dealer.


* Overhead bed extremely annoying whilst driving ie: rattling, chattering, squeaking - Dealer had already tried to cure this for the previous owners by adding washers/packers, but unsuccessfully.


* Delaminated roof/headlining mainly at the front above the overhead bed, but also some delamination above the shower room wall noted since.

I expressed my concern that ingress of water has caused this as the mattress on the overhead bed has felt damp since we first tried to use this - this was reported to Swift by the dealer during August/September 2018, Swift want the vehicle returned to the factory for inspection/repair under warranty, but the earliest date possible was week commencing February 11th 2019, with an expected completion by week commencing March 25th 2019, Swift also agreed to inspect the noisy overhead bed at the same time.



* Then in November 2018 we found wet seating/puddle of water below side window - I once again expressed my concerns that the mattress on the overhead bed was still damp and I still believed there was water and possibly mould in the roof, and that the water had found it's way down to this seating.

We were assured by the dealer that the water was caused by a lack of a seal around the right side window, allowing rain water in, and more worryingly, in the dealers own words "the right side window could have simply fallen out at any time!"

The dealer resealed the window frame and assured us that the motorhome was again watertight.


The aftersales manager at this point did say that he can understand that we may have lost faith in the vehicle and that they would be happy to have it back so we could purchase a brand new model (we naively assumed he meant at full value).



The final straw for us was around 2 weeks after collecting the motorhome back from the repair of the side window, we found the inside of the roof above the overhead bed was dripping with water all the way across the full width of the roof line, plus the mattress and bed side curtain were also soaking wet, along with the same area around the right side window and below, that had been wet previously.


We took the motorhome back to the dealer on December 19th but the after sales manager was off for Christmas until December 27th.


When we spoke to him around December 27th he said that they had now found the solar panel cable entry point was leaking water in and needed the external fixing box to be replaced and resealed.


I told him I had had enough and now wanted him to take the vehicle back as he had agreed, so we could purchase a new replacement vehicle.

He agreed and said he would ask the sales manager to contact me with a price for a new vehicle.



In the meantime the solar panel roof leak was repaired and the aftersales manager tried to gain information from Swift regarding what was involved in the factory inspection/repair of the delamination, this is because at this point we didn't realise we had any legal rights to a refund and we were hoping for definite confirmation that there was no risk of mould/bacteria in the roof above the overhead bed.



On January 19th we had a call from the sales manager, this is when things turned sour!


Yes the dealer would have our motorhome back, but they would only offer us £38k in a part exchange!

So after just 4 months use and 6 short trips we were expected to take an 8k loss.


I told them I wasn't accepting that and would need to take legal advice.


This is when I found the consumer rights act 2015 existed.


On February 1st 2019 I emailed the aftersales manager to officially reject my motorhome under the consumers rights act 2015 on the basis that it is of unsatisfactory quality and not fit for purpose, and to state that I do not want the factory repair of the delamination of the interior roof as Swift wish to keep the vehicle for around 6 weeks for this.


On February 6th he emailed me back to say he would need to discuss this with his senior management team and would email me back within 7 working days.


On February 15th I hadn't received a reply so I emailed him again asking for a response.


On February 19th (today) I have received a reply to say they do not accept my rejection as they have repaired everything except the delamination of the interior roof, that this is only cosmetic, and that the vehicle has a 10 year body warranty.



My obvious concern is that the roof delamination is due to the ingress of water.

Plus in telephone conversations with the after sales manager he has stated that the Swift technical team have admitted they are experiencing condensation issues with vehicles produced since 2017 that have fibreglass roofs and overhead beds, possibly due to temperature differences, and that having checked other vehicles at the dealership for servicing, they have found condensation in a number of those as well.


** And yes, I have recorded these conversations thanks to the advice on this forum, thank you for that **



So to summerise I believe the motorhome is not fit for purpose because:


* The health risks of damp/bacteria in overhead bed area, either due to condensation issues or trapped water in roof.


* The repair at factory would be a further 6 weeks of no use.


* We purchased this mostly for business trips for which we've had no use since December 19th.


* The quality of the vehicle is not satisfactory.



Am I correct in thinking that I now have the right to reject and expect a full refund as my email of rejection was sent during the 6 month period?



I almost forgot to add, I paid roughly half by debit card and half is on hp, the hp company say they will only need to get involved if we don't come to an agreement with the dealer, their t&c's seem to suggest the same.


Thank you in advance and apologies for such a long thread!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm reading through this – but it's very long. Have you told is who you bought it from?


Exactly what date did you buy it? Please answer this quickly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I'm still trying to get an overview of your story, but my first reaction is that you purchased on August 9 and you wrote to them on 1 February so you have scraped in. I was frightened that you hadn't yet written to them.


Please could you post up the letter that you sent in PDF format.


Also I should say that given the extent of the problems, The Consumer Rights Act won't make a whole lot of difference to because it seems to me that the extent of the problems mean that their breach of contract is pretty fundamental and as such has undermined the whole purpose of the contract from your point of view. This would mean that where the you are within the six months or beyond it, you are probably entitled to treat the contract as terminated and recover a full refund plus any ancillary losses.


The problem here is that the value of the motorhome is well beyond £10,000. In case you aren't aware, £10,000 is the small claims limit and that means that if you bring a court action against AEG Motorhomes in Stourbridge, you may well be suing for a far greater sum than that. This would put you squarely into the fast track and that means that if you happen to lose the case, then you will be liable for the other side's costs. If you what you have said, it is extremely unlikely that you would lose – but you need to understand your position and factor in these risks.


Even though you may have a winning hand in terms of litigation, when a company is aware that is being sued on a fast track action, it sometimes attempts to intimidate or to bully an individual litigant by accumulating lawyers costs and threatening the claimant that they will be liable for costs in the event that they lose the case. This can be very unnerving.


Let me read through a bit more and I get back to you. Please post up the letter that you have sent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is certainly unfortunate that you consented to so many of the problems being repaired because in a way by doing that, you have indicated that you have accepted the vehicle in its new condition.


On the other hand, this is such a catalogue of problems and it has caused such inconvenience that you certainly have a good argument to say that the accumulation of breaches has undermined the purpose of the contract.

I also agree with you that the ingress of water is extremely serious.


There is that the only outstanding issue? Please could you list the outstanding issues.


What have they proposed in respect of the damp problem?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the initial problems I suppose we put down to being a used van, but it does suggest there was no pdi check carried out before we took delivery, eventhough we were told we had to wait a couple of weeks between paying our deposit and collecting the vehicle, so they could service & valet the vehicle and carry out the habitational check.


All but the water leaks were taken care of in just two visits back to the dealership and were completed by September 28th, so we assumed that was the end of our problems.


And to be honest, AEG staff were very friendly and helpful so we weren't concerned at first.


We became more concerned when we first found water and mould from the leaking side window in November, and then finally we had had enough when we found so much water hanging from the interior roof lining a couple of weeks after the side window repair.


We didn't stop the repair of the solar panel leak because we had been lead to believe AEG were having the motorhome back and they were simply repairing the motorhome so they could resell it.


We haven't had the motorhome back, or inspected it, since we left it with AEG on December 19th, so I don't know how well the roof has been repaired.

If this is now cured and leak free then the only outstanding repair that I'm aware of is the delaminated interior roof lining over the overhead bed.


Swift apparently refuse to tell AEG what they intended doing with this, but Swifts technical team have apparently admitted, off the record, that they are experiencing condensation issues with the overhead bed models because of how close the mattress is to the fibreglass roof.


Swift are also suggesting that the fibreglass roof panel won't absorb water so AEG disagree that the roof could have been holding water, my concern is that water, and mould, has been trapped between the layers of fibreglass and compressed polystyrene in the roof construction though.


Plus, the overhead bed in my opinion isn't fit for purpose if it can't be left in the locked up position, as advised by Swift, if it will cause more condensation.


I will try and copy my letter to AEG for you but it is also very long!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we understand enough now that there is no need for the letter.


Also, I hadn't understood that the motorhome was now back with AEG and they were repairing it.


I think to a certain extent that by agreeing to do this, you have sacrificed your rights to consider the contract as terminated.


I think that you need to visit the motorhome and see what state it is in now.


Of course the final question is what action are you prepared to take about it? If you reject it on the basis that the beaches amount to a termination by them of the contract, and if they do not accept your position – and it seems unlikely that they will, are you prepared to sue them for this kind of value?


We had several motorhome problems on this forum – as you have already read. The problem is always that you are dealing with high value items that take you well out of the small claims track and you are dealing with retailers who don't seem too bothered about shutting their customers in terms of their consumer rights.


Frankly I get the impression that the motorhome industry is pretty cowboy – and I'm a bit surprised that they get away with it because as far as I know there are several motorhome forums and I would have thought that the word gets around pretty quickly and that these people have to look after their reputation – but this doesn't seem to be the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The motorhome isn't being repaired at the moment, I have cancelled the pending factory repair of the delaminated interior roof because I'm worried that there is mould in the roof, and Swift apparently won't tell AEG if they will be removing a section for inspection or replacement, plus they want to keep the motorhome for around 6 more weeks for this.


Regarding taking legal action, this is what we are considering, and why I wanted your readers experienced opinions, to help me assess if it would be worth the financial risk of losing any action.


We really don't want the motorhome back because it appears to be unhealthy, and untrustworthy.


I do agree that the motorhome industry seems very poor when it comes to quality of product though yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...