Northwood Manufacturing's Defective Trailer

[windstrucklady]

My husband and I purchased a brand new 2010 Northwood True North OSV trailer in May, 2010.

In April 2014 we pulled back the floor to find extensive water damage. We could wring the water out of the floor insulation and the pressboard was so soft and wet we could push our finger through it. There was also mold.

We had used the trailer less than 20 times and we took very good care of it.

When I spoke with Northwood in April, they said that the only thing Northwood could offer was to fix the trailer cheaper than anyone else (though could not provide a quote), if we got it to Northwood ourselves (5.5 hours away) and the waitlist was at least 2 months out.

I understand that the trailer only had a one year limited warranty on it, and at the time of purchase my husband and I figured that would not be a problem as we thought Northwood was a reputable company that makes high quality products.

I guess we were wrong. 4 years later and with ligher pockets we are left with a destroyed trailer that our insurance company deems a write-off and that the leak is due to a manufacturer defect. As I mentioned we did not know of this issue until we pulled back the floor and saw the damage (our insurance covers flood but it does not cover anything if there is damage due to the flood, yet another example of a corporation not caring about their customers).

I am so disappointed that Northwood would produce something this poorly made and not help the people that purchased their defective product. I feel there is little to no decency left in the corporate world and no one cares about their customers. Northwood just proved me right once again.

[Admin]

After discussion from the OP and Administration I am closing this thread.

Admin
RV.net

[JJBIRISH]

Maybe…
I read and reread to opening post several times, and it seems the only purpose for it was trying to destroy this companies reputation and for that one purpose only, that is certainly how it appears at face value…

Justifiably??? I couldn’t tell from the initial post and still can’t

the OP offered no information on how or what the problem even is, or what caused the problem (except for a very broad water soaked claim), isn’t even asking a question, is aware of the limited warranty but still expects repairs to be made 3 years beyond the warranty anyway…

finds the mfg.’s good will offer to do the repairs at a discounted price unacceptable to her, so instead by all appearance attempts to bash the company to teach them a lesson…

sometimes the treatment got is equal to the treatment they gave... obviously several responders don’t agree… but most rants drive skepticism and most rants some more obviously so lack completeness and/or accuracy and deserve being vetted…

so let’s assume for one moment that this damage was due to a manufacturing defect and that defect is so bad it has destroyed the unit…
is it reasonable to assume that after 20 trips and four years the defect has only now presented itself with no indication it exist before, and still be able to call it a defect???

apparently the insurance has already decided it is not the result of some type of accident like a puncher in the roof or a ruptured pipe, leaving only defect or lack of maintenance as the cause…

the probability between a 4 year hidden mfg. defect verses the lack of maintenance is unlikely to say the least, but not exactly impossible, and it has happened before…
the rant at least is highly suspect and by posting it like most rants surely deserves and qualifies to be questioned or probed farther if there is anything more to it than blaming and bashing the mfg. …

so the question remains is it a rant or a heads up…

[Francesca_Knowl]

Most of us really are trying to help here, O.P., and would hope to have enough info to help you determine who the "bad guy" is here, if there is one.

In that spirit:

windstrucklady wrote:

(our insurance covers flood but it does not cover anything if there is damage due to the flood,

windstrucklady wrote:
A quick summary:

1. No plumbing in the unit.
2. No sign of leakage at all. I wanted to add a nicer floor and that is how we found the damage.

I gotta tell ya, I'm starting to wonder if the insurance company isn't givin' you the royal runaround. That business about "we'll pay for flooding but not for damage from flooding"- what the heck is THAT??? I'm still mystified as to where the water came from, and what the nature of the manufacturing defect is that (according to your insurance company) caused this disaster-?

So- WAS THERE a flood? There's no plumbing (though a small water tank is indicated in the specs-?), and no signs of leakage and yet: the floor is soaking wet. Did the water enter from below, and if so, under what circumstances?

[travelnutz]

What are you last posters attempting to mislead anyway? There's nothing the poor OP can do because her Northwood is passed it's warranty period and her insurance carrier refused the claim because perhaps they've been down this road many times before. Yes, it stinks but it's not the insurance carrier's fault that her RV leaked and they gave her the reason why. Insurance carriers keep in depth records and know which products they cover have the highest frequency of claims and for what reason. What more do or did you expect the insurance carrier to do? Fix a built in defect no of their cause? Cover poor construction proceedures etc or any RV that was not manitained reasonably which the OP said this was NOT the case with her RV. I feel really bad for the RV owner as she's been cheated.

Maybe the insurance carrier is telling some dirty little secrets about some manufacturer's that some owners don't want to hear. She can request another look and a written explanation as to what the defect was so she'd have some ammunition to confront Northwood with. Neither the OP nor the insurance carrier designed, built, nor sold the RV to the OP, Northwood did and if confronted with a written claim of a defect, they'd still use the excuse that it's out of warranty and therefore the OP must pay to repair the RV or junk it. Either way, the OP will be taking it in the shorts thru no cause of her own. Maybe the OP really is exposing something the buying public should know and be aware of before buying a particular brand RV! Especially what is supposed to be claimed as a "Top of the line RV". That's the ripoff!

[cKarlGo]

ScottG wrote:

garyhaupt wrote:

westend wrote:

This is the second rant post this week about a damaged RV and the other owner decided to do nothing about it but wring hands. I'm posting to find out if this will be a one-and-out or if the owner will take some action.

I dunno dude...do you practice being this way, or does it come naturally? The poster you are referring to, brought her story, explained it as best she could, and ultimately, proved a bunch of you to be the fools you are, coming back with the news that her insurance company, Mutual of Omaha, totaled her 5th, due to a manufacturers design issue.

People come on here, in the naivete thinking that posting their problem will get them maybe an answer, maybe some guidance...something, anything, that might help. Instead they get slammed by people that have nothing else better to do than play whacker-mole with them.



Gary Haupt

I nominate Gary for poster of the week. :C

Seconded. There are a number of posters here who contribute nothing but personal attacks on other posters. They are best remanded to the bit bucket, since they contribute nothing whatsoever.

[dspencer]

garyhaupt wrote:

westend wrote:

This is the second rant post this week about a damaged RV and the other owner decided to do nothing about it but wring hands. I'm posting to find out if this will be a one-and-out or if the owner will take some action.

I dunno dude...do you practice being this way, or does it come naturally? The poster you are referring to, brought her story, explained it as best she could, and ultimately, proved a bunch of you to be the fools you are, coming back with the news that her insurance company, Mutual of Omaha, totaled her 5th, due to a manufacturers design issue.

People come on here, in the naivete thinking that posting their problem will get them maybe an answer, maybe some guidance...something, anything, that might help. Instead they get slammed by people that have nothing else better to do than play whacker-mole with them.



Gary Haupt

This seems to happen all too often on here Gary!

[westend]

garyhaupt wrote:

westend wrote:

This is the second rant post this week about a damaged RV and the other owner decided to do nothing about it but wring hands. I'm posting to find out if this will be a one-and-out or if the owner will take some action.

I dunno dude...do you practice being this way, or does it come naturally? The poster you are referring to, brought her story, explained it as best she could, and ultimately, proved a bunch of you to be the fools you are, coming back with the news that her insurance company, Mutual of Omaha, totaled her 5th, due to a manufacturers design issue.

People come on here, in the naivete thinking that posting their problem will get them maybe an answer, maybe some guidance...something, anything, that might help. Instead they get slammed by people that have nothing else better to do than play whacker-mole with them.



Gary Haupt

......

[travelnutz]

I called my insurance place (RV's are underwritten by The Hanover Group) this morning and asked them about water damage coverage from a leak or a flood and how premiums are calculated for different brands. Her answer was that various manufacturers and model lines are classified by risk level experience into categories. BTW, Yes, they do cover leaks from an event cause or natural disaster flood damage but not if from neglect or a manufacturing error or defect. Makes sense to me.

Then I asked her about which brands or model lines were in the high risk category and she read the list off her computer of the high and cautionary manufacturers and Northwood was one of them. I asked, what does that do to the premium rates and she said it is in a higher rate per thousand category for the comprehensive RV unit damage coverage due to the higher risk but the other coverages (Liability, medical, etc are not affected. Just the RV itself.

I can't repeat what else was said as she asked me not to repeat it but it made good sense of why the various classification levels are being used and why. Unfortunately, the OP has found out for themselves with the high dollar loss they must endure personally.

Not scientific by any means but kind of answered many questions I had as to where our RV's were on the list because our non-motorized RV insurance premiums are extremely cheap per each 6 month period. 6 month period/premium is how they write their policies. We've had the same insurance company blanket coverage policies for the last 33 years and not about to change.

As I've posted before, we had a tree fall and crush/total our 36' Carriage 5th wheel in 2006 while we weren't in it and in 2012 a tornado went over the top of us down in Florida in February and some of the larger branches that fell butt first gouged/ripped our rubber roof membrane and gouged the plywood under it on our other 5th wheel. I went up and put adhesive around and under the tears and put Gorilla tape layers over the ripped and called our insurance company and they OK'd it so we could get it back home to have it repaired which was another layer of plywood over the original wood and a new membrane and moldings. Looks just like new and has double plywood for the roof now! Our insurance company sent an adjuster and our insurance was outstanding plus and covered both beyond our expectations. NO, our insurance premimums did not go up a dime from either claim as it was from natural causes.

[nomad297]

garyhaupt wrote:
Instead they get slammed by people that have nothing else better to do than play whacker-mole with them.

Actually, it's Whac-a-mole.

Bruce

[ScottG]

garyhaupt wrote:

westend wrote:

This is the second rant post this week about a damaged RV and the other owner decided to do nothing about it but wring hands. I'm posting to find out if this will be a one-and-out or if the owner will take some action.

I dunno dude...do you practice being this way, or does it come naturally? The poster you are referring to, brought her story, explained it as best she could, and ultimately, proved a bunch of you to be the fools you are, coming back with the news that her insurance company, Mutual of Omaha, totaled her 5th, due to a manufacturers design issue.

People come on here, in the naivete thinking that posting their problem will get them maybe an answer, maybe some guidance...something, anything, that might help. Instead they get slammed by people that have nothing else better to do than play whacker-mole with them.



Gary Haupt

I nominate Gary for poster of the week. :C

[garyhaupt]

westend wrote:

This is the second rant post this week about a damaged RV and the other owner decided to do nothing about it but wring hands. I'm posting to find out if this will be a one-and-out or if the owner will take some action.

I dunno dude...do you practice being this way, or does it come naturally? The poster you are referring to, brought her story, explained it as best she could, and ultimately, proved a bunch of you to be the fools you are, coming back with the news that her insurance company, Mutual of Omaha, totaled her 5th, due to a manufacturers design issue.

People come on here, in the naivete thinking that posting their problem will get them maybe an answer, maybe some guidance...something, anything, that might help. Instead they get slammed by people that have nothing else better to do than play whacker-mole with them.



Gary Haupt

[mich800]

It would still be nice for clarification on point #4 to maybe help other owners. I am not sure if these RV dealers referred to in the comment were speaking to leaks in general or with this model. Doing a search to research this only pulls up this tread with problems with that TT.

What is the relevance to #5?

[CavemanCharlie]

windstrucklady wrote:
A quick summary:

1. No plumbing in the unit.
2. No sign of leakage at all. I wanted to add a nicer floor and that is how we found the damage.
3. Our insurance is not covering it because there was mold, even though they cover flooding, not damage caused by flooding...thank you for being polite who mentioned insurance.
4. Insurance deemed it a manufacturer's defect and have talked to RV dealers who have said this is a wide spread issue.
5. I am not American.

Thank you all for your support and kind words. 🙂

And thank you for giving more details.

I live in a house with a wet moldy basement. I've been here for 27 years. Thankfully I'm not one of the people that has allergies to mold. If it were mine I would fix the problem destroy the mold and go on my way. But, that's just me most people are not like that I completely understand this.

[nomad297]

mich800 wrote:
I would be curious what they considered the manufacturing defect.

Exactly! Why hasn't this been disclosed? I think it is because there is none.

Bruce