Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • snowball2
    • By snowball2 14th Nov 17, 11:48 PM
    • 198Posts
    • 124Thanks
    snowball2
    Section 75 help - what can we claim?
    • #1
    • 14th Nov 17, 11:48 PM
    Section 75 help - what can we claim? 14th Nov 17 at 11:48 PM
    To cut a long story short my mum, me and my two children went on a coach trip to disneyland paris in July, it was a disaster, nothing was as described or booked, kids crying. The company we booked with are not affiliated and have no intention of refunding the money so we have subsequently found out. CAB & TS have been involved as there was a coach load of people but they don't seem have any power to do anything. I don't feel like wasting any more money by going the small claims route.

    So my mum who paid on her credit card applied for a section 75 refund to tesco bank for her mastercard, everyone else who paid by credit or debit card has been refunded but tesco said no that we had received a holiday as far as they were concerned, which is a joke, and we provided all of the evidence they asked for. So anyway we have now refereed it to the ombudsman, who have asked them to follow their complaints procedure.

    My mum paid the cost of the holiday on her card but in our original letter to the holiday company we asked for this plus our expenses and compensation for loss of enjoyment (there was no enjoyment at all it was hell) which CAB advised us to do which was the cost of an equivalent holiday.

    So will the credit card be liable for the actual cost paid (amount paid on the cc) or the full claim including compensation amount as we claimed from the company who took the payment and didn't provide the advertised holiday trip?
    Ive searched but cant decided what the correct answer is.

    Thanks in advance
    Trying to do it the OS way

    Gave up smoking 1 April 2006
Page 1
    • eskbanker
    • By eskbanker 15th Nov 17, 12:31 AM
    • 5,804 Posts
    • 5,691 Thanks
    eskbanker
    • #2
    • 15th Nov 17, 12:31 AM
    • #2
    • 15th Nov 17, 12:31 AM
    My view is that if the trip hadn't been delivered at all then you (or rather your mum) would have been able to claim a refund of the full invoiced cost of the booking, but presumably Tesco's line of argument is that you spent some time at Disneyland Paris itself (regardless of issues on the journey) and therefore a full refund wouldn't be in order?

    If you're looking for expenses and compensation over and above a refund, I can't see that being justifiable, although it perhaps depends on exactly what expenses you have in mind, and as you say, you've cut a long story short, so we can only judge on what you've posted so far....
    • snowball2
    • By snowball2 15th Nov 17, 1:04 AM
    • 198 Posts
    • 124 Thanks
    snowball2
    • #3
    • 15th Nov 17, 1:04 AM
    • #3
    • 15th Nov 17, 1:04 AM
    We booked a 3 night trip at Disney staying onsite with two day hopper tickets via a local travel company.

    Hotel we ended up in was 19 miles away with no transport links to the Disney parks.
    We did received a 2 day hopper ticket finally at 7pm on the first day which was paid for by a third party company who had never had payment, after sitting outside the gates for 3 hours in the morning, then been told to pack our bags as we were going home. So we had one day in the parks in the end, but we were all too stressed and tired to enjoy it.
    We didn't get the third night at the hotel as the coach company had not been paid we could only afford as a group to pay for them to stay on one extra day so had to travel home over night in the coach on the second day, otherwise the coach was leaving and returning on the first day with us on it or not.
    Trying to do it the OS way

    Gave up smoking 1 April 2006
    • chattychappy
    • By chattychappy 15th Nov 17, 7:53 AM
    • 6,401 Posts
    • 3,375 Thanks
    chattychappy
    • #4
    • 15th Nov 17, 7:53 AM
    • #4
    • 15th Nov 17, 7:53 AM
    S75 simply gives you the same rights to make a claim against the CC as you get in normal contract law against a party who has breached a contract or misrepresented. The claim can be in excess of the original mount paid.

    Personally I wouldn't shy away from making a small claim. I would suggest claiming the full cost of the holiday, plus lost earnings for anybody that was earning who took paid holiday. Now that is pushing things too far, but it does sound like the holiday was a write-off plus you would have to take more time off to take another.

    That said, once you've issued the claim form, there is a chance to negotiate rather than follow the thing through to a hearing. Most claims settle, I would suggest considering settling on a full refund. You will have to pay a fee to start the process, but at least when you have it is in the hands of a neutral court rather than the CC. Somehow I feel you have a better chance with the courts than the ombudsman.

    If you do issue a small claim, then put both the supplier and the CC down as defendents.
    Last edited by chattychappy; 15-11-2017 at 10:56 PM.
    • eco_warrior
    • By eco_warrior 15th Nov 17, 9:42 AM
    • 48 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    eco_warrior
    • #5
    • 15th Nov 17, 9:42 AM
    • #5
    • 15th Nov 17, 9:42 AM
    The problem with trips and holidays is substantiating the claim and showing there was a breach of contract rather that just a poor standard of service.


    Not known any claims of this nature to be upheld but with FOS you might get some joy, seems unlikely though.
    • MEM62
    • By MEM62 15th Nov 17, 2:01 PM
    • 1,382 Posts
    • 995 Thanks
    MEM62
    • #6
    • 15th Nov 17, 2:01 PM
    • #6
    • 15th Nov 17, 2:01 PM
    I don't feel like wasting any more money by going the small claims route.
    Originally posted by snowball2
    I think this is your best route to compensation. If you case is a strong at it appears on face value it could hardly be considered a waste of money.
    • snowball2
    • By snowball2 15th Nov 17, 10:13 PM
    • 198 Posts
    • 124 Thanks
    snowball2
    • #7
    • 15th Nov 17, 10:13 PM
    • #7
    • 15th Nov 17, 10:13 PM
    I saw small claims a waste of money as the company will never pay up and just fold up their plc as they have done before so I would end up paying for no return, but I did not know I could take the cc in with the small claims?
    Trying to do it the OS way

    Gave up smoking 1 April 2006
    • chattychappy
    • By chattychappy 15th Nov 17, 11:06 PM
    • 6,401 Posts
    • 3,375 Thanks
    chattychappy
    • #8
    • 15th Nov 17, 11:06 PM
    • #8
    • 15th Nov 17, 11:06 PM
    I saw small claims a waste of money as the company will never pay up and just fold up their plc as they have done before so I would end up paying for no return, but I did not know I could take the cc in with the small claims?
    Originally posted by snowball2
    Most certainly you can. S75 makes the CC jointly and severally liable for breach or misrep. So you can choose to sue either or both. (If you sue just one party, it is possible for the other party to be joined into the action.) I would put both down.

    It is no panacea. Google around to get an idea how to write your "particulars of claim". Oh yes, here is a tip. You can sue online using "moneyclaim online". There are two parts to issuing a claim: the claim itself and the "particulars of claim". You can do both online and most people do. BUT you get very limited space for your "particulars of claim". Much better to write this out and send to follow. Nicely numbered paragraphs, well spaced out. Again, Google around for some examples. For small claim, judges will overlook technical irregularities, but you must set out your claim logically and clearly. Eg what you were promised/reasonably expected, how did they fail, why you claim money because of this.

    I'm not pushing you to litigation, just don't hesitate if you think it could work for you. Remember, the objective isn't to stand up in court to win your case. The idea is to set out your claim well enough that the other parties' fear losing in court and don't want the expense/hassle of running the case in the meantime. So you do a deal. Sorted!
    • chanz4
    • By chanz4 17th Nov 17, 9:23 AM
    • 9,883 Posts
    • 2,873 Thanks
    chanz4
    • #9
    • 17th Nov 17, 9:23 AM
    • #9
    • 17th Nov 17, 9:23 AM
    Think should warn as others have not, if issues via mcol, and the defendant disputes they can make you travel to their local court and also you will need to pay a hearing fee of around 200 on top.
    Don't put your trust into an Experian score - it is not a number any bank will ever use & it is generally a waste of money to purchase it. They are also selling you insurance you dont need.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,987Posts Today

8,640Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Wow Philip Hammond doing his own #budgettranslations "This is the bit with the long economicy words in it". I quite like that!

  • Great free advert for Strepsils there from the Chancellor and PM!

  • UK outside EU "A prosperous and inclusive community. Where everyone has opportunity to shine. Dream of homeowners? https://t.co/xd61P0yidy

  • Follow Martin