Erroneous Description and Subsequent Illegal Sale of an Autocruise Starblazer Motorhome by Marquis Motorhomes
June - July 2014

 Comments on the So-called Complaints Procedure

Barry and Margaret Williamson

Start with: Introduction and Overview

The Previous File: The Marquis Attempt at a 'Complaints Procedure'

The Next File: The Origin of the Complaints Procedure 

See all Nine Files at: Marquis Malpractice 

This is the almost unbelievable story of how Marquis Motorhomes failed to deal with any of the several complaints we made arising from their mis-advertising and mis-selling of an overweight motorhome from their South Yorkshire branch and how they refused to refund the money we had paid without inordinate delay and draconian conditions. 

27 July 2014
 
Dear John

We were not aware of what you call your complaints procedure and we have not seen your attached Word Document before. Had we known of the procedure we would definitely have used it, as far as it goes. Having discovered that you could neither respond to, nor act on, our various complaints, we would certainly have written to the Group After Care Manager at the address given.

However, we start by being suspicious of the origins of the document you attached. It is obviously a Word Document, typed and printed. It is not a photocopy, a PDF document or an extract from a larger publication. Therefore, it has not been produced in a protected form, nor is it suitable for wider circulation. There is no heading and no attribution, no names, no date, no provenance.  It looks like a one-off piece of typing rather than an official company document. Not least, it doesn't point out what the Group After Care Manager might do, having received a complaint. So far, he has done nothing, which makes us wonder if he is still waiting for something on paper, posted to him!

The mention of a Group After Care Manager drew our attention back to the 17 July document signed by one Alan Doherty! This is the first time he has been identified as the man to whom we should have addressed our complaints! Instead of writing to him, we have been writing to you. We only recently copied emails to Alan Doherty, because you were doing so. We assumed he was your line manager and he certainly has behaved like one!

In practice, the complaints procedure has consisted of us writing to you. You may or may not have been passing on our complaints to Alan Doherty, with or without your own comments. There is no transparency there. We had no opportunity to present our case in writing at what you now define as the second stage of the complaints procedure. At this second stage, the complaints should have been thoroughly and independently investigated, the outcomes from which should then have been reported back to us.

If we were still not satisfied, there should be a third stage in which, after a given time interval, we could refer our complaints to an independent external assessor, along with the written responses we have received from you and from the second-stage assessor. This would have been in line with common and recommended practice, such as that required in the Code of the NCC. It is also the procedure recommended by the Financial Ombudsman Service, among others.

None of this has happened; instead the man who supposedly handles complaints above the level of branch manager told you to present us with an ultimatum: agree to withdraw your complaints and tell no-one what has happened and then you'll get your money, but only after waiting an undetermined time. We are still waiting. Is this Marquis taking 'great pride in the quality of service'. We can, it is written in your Word document, 'be assured that the matter will be fully investigated and corrective actions taken'. Your 'corrective action' is: 'withdraw your complaints without having them dealt with, don't tell anyone what's happened and you'll get your money back when it suits us'!!!!
 
Some way to handle complaints!

The professional advice we have received is that we were due the return of our caravan and money, without any conditions, as soon as we returned the mis-sold motorhome to you. You did not hesitate to advertise the motorhome for sale again, without returning our money. Instead, you have used the refunding of our money, our legal right, to suppress the complaints and, to make matters worse, delayed the return of our money.    

At every stage your organisation has made matters worse, when it could have been a simple and amicable process, easily and smoothly remedied, and an opportunity for you and your staff to learn from.

Sadly, organisations can grow so large, hierarchical and bureaucratic that they lose touch with their customer base and fall into states of hubris, which can lead to nemesis. Think Brownhills!

Look, just return our money and stop digging ever deeper holes for yourselves. An apology and an immediate refund, together with some extra compensation, would have been the way out for a responsible and honourable company. We need to get on with our lives, which means a new motorhome and a new journey. Instead, it's been over a month ago on 23 June that we first entered the Dinnington premises. If only we had known what awaited us!

By the way, the reason we have been writing to you at such length is so that we have a full record of our experience, and your responses, should further action be required.

Barry and Margaret Williamson

27 July 2014

Start with: Introduction and Overview

The Previous File: The Marquis Attempt at a 'Complaints Procedure'

The Next File: The Origin of the Complaints Procedure 

See all Nine Files at: Marquis Malpractice