A manufacturer fault ruined our home and contents, are we entitled to compensation?

• Tuesday, 2 June 2009
• Kathleen Retourne
• 0 Comments

My wife and I and I decided to buy a park home as it appeared to be an ideal solution to our circumstances, i.e. stress free, low maintenance, and a ten-year Gold Shield Warranty if any problems should occur.
We purchased a new home on site in October 2002 and hoped to begin our new ‘idyllic way of life.’
Then, in early 2003, we found the coats in our cloakroom, on the outside wall, were wet with damp. Our manufacturer sent round an engineer who said that the problem was cold air from the outside reacting with the warmth of the inside wall. I was under the impression that insulation was meant to stop that and feared that maybe the insulation was insufficient, but the engineer assured it was adequate. Since then, however, we have been unable to use our cloakroom.
In late 2003, the clothes in a free standing wardrobe, by the outside wall in the bedroom, smelt musty and the bottom of the same wall in the built-in wardrobe in the second bedroom was going black with mould. Again we contacted our manufacturer, who once more sent out an engineer. This time he concluded that the clothes in the built-in wardrobe were to close to the wall and this was restricting airflow. However, he made no mention of the free standing one. We had shelves built in the wardrobe to avoid anything touching the wall and hoped that was that.
By January 2005, things were so bad we asked the site manager to contact Gold Shield for us, to try and sort the problem. By this time our manufacturer said that because the home had a plywood skirt, capillary action was the cause and we needed to have a brick skirt built with a 25mm gap etc.
Following this report the original plywood skirt was then removed and replaced that summer with a professionally built brick skirt, with an air gap around, plus airbricks at regular intervals.
We believed the problem had been solved once and for all and waited for a period of time for the house to dry out in order to redecorate because of the damage that had been caused by the damp.
Unfortunately, the damp problem has not improved and is in fact now even worse than before. So much so, that in some areas mould is even appearing inside and out of freestanding furniture.
I employed an independent park home surveyor to check my home in April 2008 and have again contacted Gold Shield to restart the original claim. They have told me they fully accept my surveyor’s findings and are writing to the manufacturer accordingly.
We are afraid our manufacturer will once again come up with excuses rather than admit that the problem is their fault and we will end up living in a home that will slowly fall apart and become totally valueless.
The state we are still in is now starting to affect our health. The reason we bought a park home was because I was left disabled following a stroke brought on by stress, and this seemed the ideal lifestyle to avoid another one, the situation is not helping me at all.
In your opinion do you think we have a claim to reject the home as ‘Not of Merchantable Quality’ after this length of time, though obviously at today’s price of a new sited home?
Or, would it be regarded as blighted if I tried to sell it, even if it was repaired?
Could we claim compensation and what would you regard as reasonable, to include cover for damage to clothes, surveyor’s costs, redecorating, carpets damaged by mould and also the amount of stress we have both had to endure for the last 4 plus years?

First, it is not clear whether the engineer you first called out in early 2003 was through the manufacture directly or was via Gold Shield. In any case it would have been wise to have had Gold Shield involved in the matter right at the outset and certainly within the first year to take advantage of the full warranty position.
In my view (as a non engineer) I cannot accept the factory engineers view that condensation on the inside walls of a mobile home is the norm.
With the information that you have provided, it would seem that you did not get Gold Shield involved until some  years later, which I think is a mistake. However, you did eventually get them involved and I hope they know that this is an issue that dates back as early as 2003, when the manufacturer’s engineer first considered the matter, within the first year of warranty.
The survey that you obtained and provided shows this is an inherent defect with the caravan per se which Gold Shield should have dealt with in the beginning. In my view, you really need to take up dialogue with Gold Shield on this issue because if it is not achieved quite quickly you will be caught with, on the one hand, Gold Shield denying responsibility because the claim was not directed to them in the first year and on the other hand, the manufacturer denying responsibility as they have by claiming there is a capillary problem.
The thrust of your efforts must be with Gold Shield and, in view of the fact that the manufacturer seems to be unable to satisfactory resolve this matter, Gold Shield should be persuaded to employ a specialist contractor to carry out the repairs.
It may be now that both parties deny any responsibility. If this is the case I am afraid the whole matter will become quite legally complicated. I would normally recommend, in the circumstances where fairly minor works were required and/or the manufacturer/Gold Shield refuse to be involved, that a contractor be brought in to carry out the work following which, you present the bill to either/or the manufacturer/ Gold Shield, having given them notice of your intention to do so. This may eventually result in a battle in court to recover the money.
In practice, my own experience dealing with Gold Shield suggests that where cases of merit,  such as yours, are presented to them, they normally adopt a helpful approach.

If you need any direct help with any documents or a draft constitution, you can call our legal helpline on 01275 373762, fax 01275 371789, email specialist@phlslaw.co.uk or visit www.phls.net