Reliability survey where is it?

At the end of the summer would imply the September or October magazines. Just in time for those visiting the NEC to peruse before making any decisions. On second thoughts, probably the November magazine then.  

As with Band Girl and DEBSC, all I can recall of the survey is being asked a lot of pointless questions about obscure caravans that I knew nothing about.

The results will therefore be pointless.

Even if the survey had been conducted well (it wasn't) then delaying the results for at least 12 months renders them meaningless. Every manufacturer who gets a negative score (and I'm not at all sure that the CC would even publish such a thing) would simply say that they have imprved things over the last year.

Anyway, when is the end of summer? Are we working to a similar time-scale to the forum up-date here??

Come now, Ian. You know full well the update is being rolled out at the end of the first quarter of 2016.

Over a year to publish? Really?

It stinks of the survey not being for the benefit of members but for something else and letting us know  the results is just an unwanted hinderance that is continually kicked into the long grass.

Very poor CC

Simon

I am not happy with the delay and had doubts that the results were ever going to be released but your post is way over the top. 

Which? do their car survey every year, and this year they had feedback from almost 60000 car owners. The survey had to be filled in by the end of January this year, and the results have just been published in the August mag. Why is it taking the CC so long? As others have said the results were probably not what they wanted, so they are busy making it look better for their advertised brands. Allegedly.

Which surveys are every year and they know in advance the level to expect and can arrange things on that basis. This was the first by the club for many years and the numbers were not known. The PC survey gets about 4,000 replies so if the club looked at that they would expect far less than they got so would not be ready for these numbers. 

Anyone thinking that the club would fiddle the results is not being realistic. I did wonder if they were going to publish the full results but do not doubt that whatever they do publish will be correct. If a serious underestimate of the numbers was the problem and possibly too many questions then if we get good figures then we should forgive the delays.

So will they eventually be publishing my thoughts on a caravan brand that I know nothing about? Because that's what the survey asked me about.

Not sure that a series of "don't know"s will be of much help to anyone......

 

Anyone thinking that the club would fiddle the results is not being realistic. I did wonder if they were going to publish the full results but do not doubt that whatever they do publish will be correct. If a serious underestimate of the numbers was the problem and possibly too many questions then if we get good figures then we should forgive the delays.

Wildwood...would you say that their 'expose' on leisure batteries was 'correct' then?

 

Anyone thinking that the club would fiddle the results is not being realistic. I did wonder if they were going to publish the full results but do not doubt that whatever they do publish will be correct. If a serious underestimate of the numbers was the problem and possibly too many questions then if we get good figures then we should forgive the delays.

Wildwood...would you say that their 'expose' on leisure batteries was 'correct' then?

Basically what they published was fact. It should have named names though. Possibly as these were based on opinions as to what leaisure batteries were there was room for problems.

In this case what they are publishing are the replies of thousands of mebers so no room for argument on the statistics. We will just have to see what comes out but as long as they stick to the facts there should be no possibility of them being sued and I do not believe the figures will be fiddled to produce what they want but it will be interesting to see if the PC reports are similar.

I am as disappointed as anyone and sincerely hope that the survey is actually published in a form that members and the industry can make use of.

I do think that with the online nature of the survey (I don't recall a paper version which would have been a bit silly these days?) responses should have been designed to go straight into a database which could have been easily interrogated by standard software if there were 40, 400, 4000 or 4 million responses.

If I recall correctly, there were some free responses which are much more difficult to analyse automatically but all of that is down to the initial design of the survey.