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@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • ukstreets
    • By ukstreets 19th Aug 17, 7:09 PM
    • 7Posts
    • 2Thanks
    ukstreets
    New Kitchen fitting disaster looking for advice.
    • #1
    • 19th Aug 17, 7:09 PM
    New Kitchen fitting disaster looking for advice. 19th Aug 17 at 7:09 PM
    Hi

    I recently purchased a new kitchen in February 2017. I found a company advertising on the internet and they came out to do surveys. We enjoyed the whole process with the designer who visited us at our house a total of three times and after going through the plans during his second visit to our house we paid a deposit of £4000 on a Santander credit card using his card machine. This was followed up by a bank transfer to the kitchen company of just over £13500 a week before the work would start.

    Work started one week later and our kitchen was completely gutted.
    Issue 1:
    Our problems started when the kitchen units were delivered as they were not the ones that we had ordered and of a much cheaper quality. I immediately called the company and told them that the kitchen doors and drawer fronts were not the ones we had ordered and that I would not accept what had been shipped. I was told that they had shipped what I had ordered. As the road I live on has the same name as the style and quality of doors and drawers we wanted we knew we had not made a mistake. I told the company that I did not want the kitchen fitted and that it could all be taken back, this was a very difficult thing to do as I had just an empty room now. I was told that they would look into getting the doors and drawers replaced and so I compromised on having the carcasses of the units and appliances installed.
    Issue 2:
    The units were not fitted well, plumbing of the sink has no ptrap u-bend so the room fills with the smell of drains, the 5 ring gas hob was not fitted by a registered gas fitter so was fitted illegally and also was positioned poorly so that we cannot use all the rings on the hob without the risk of pots or pans falling to the floor. We have electrical sockets and light sockets hanging from walls and not safe.

    Currently I have no drawers or doors fitted to the units, the gas hob is unsafe to use and I am very worried about the electrical sockets.

    I called the company and was given "we are looking into it" responses with no progress so I wrote to them in April and then again in May with no responses.

    The kitchen companies website says that if things go wrong by paying a deposit on a credit card my consumer rights are protected under Section 75 and even link to MoneySavingExpert and one of Martin's articles on Section 75. With this in mind in July I wrote to Santander and explained my situation and that I wished to claim under Section 75.

    Santander have declined my claim as they say my payment went through paypal and so there is a break in the link between them and the kitchen company. I appealed this decision as there is no way that I could know paypal was in the chain because I was handed a plain card reader in my home. I would understand their decision if I had logged into the paypal website and sent money to the company but all I did was use the plain card reader that I was presented with like I am at restaurants and shops.

    I am really lost now and looking for advice, should I go to the ombudsman or is that a lost cause? Should I go to trading standards? Do I have to face a legal battle with the kitchen company?
Page 1
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 19th Aug 17, 7:14 PM
    • 10,053 Posts
    • 8,127 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    • #2
    • 19th Aug 17, 7:14 PM
    • #2
    • 19th Aug 17, 7:14 PM
    What's the name of the company?
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 19th Aug 17, 7:42 PM
    • 700 Posts
    • 357 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    • #3
    • 19th Aug 17, 7:42 PM
    • #3
    • 19th Aug 17, 7:42 PM
    You gave the salesman your credit card, he used a machine and it debited your PayPal account?
    • LABMAN
    • By LABMAN 19th Aug 17, 8:49 PM
    • 701 Posts
    • 1,161 Thanks
    LABMAN
    • #4
    • 19th Aug 17, 8:49 PM
    • #4
    • 19th Aug 17, 8:49 PM
    You gave the salesman your credit card, he used a machine and it debited your PayPal account?
    Originally posted by Warwick Hunt
    I suspect the credit card payment went through the kitchen fitting company's PayPal account.
    • eddddy
    • By eddddy 19th Aug 17, 9:25 PM
    • 5,552 Posts
    • 5,235 Thanks
    eddddy
    • #5
    • 19th Aug 17, 9:25 PM
    • #5
    • 19th Aug 17, 9:25 PM
    So it sounds like the Kitchen company used a 'Paypal Here' card reader.

    Based on these news stories, it seems that MBNA and Barclaycard initially rejected s75 claims where 'Paypal Here' was used, but eventually realised that they were wrong to do so. So perhaps you should push Santander harder:

    MBNA:

    With the help of the Which? Money Helpline, Mr Jeffrey complained to the FOS. It found the deposits were paid to the supplier directly, through a PayPal Here device (a card reader), which kept the debit-creditor-supplier link intact. MBNA was ordered to refund him more than £35,000.

    MBNA told us this was the first time it had been approached with a claim regarding PayPal Here, and there was ‘some uncertainty as a result’, but it now understands this doesn’t break the debtor-creditor-supplier chain. It apologised for the inconvenience and paid the claim in full.

    Link: http://www.which.co.uk/news/2017/07/section-75-loophole-exposed/

    Barclaycard:

    I pressed Barclaycard for a better answer and it referred the matter to its legal team. It took months to get a proper reply. Then it was a matter of Barclaycard backing down. It now agreed that a claim in relation to a transaction made with a PayPal Here device could fall within the scope of Section 75.

    Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/money-saving-tips/jessicainvestigates/11258422/PayPal-loophole-allows-Barclaycard-to-refuse-credit-card-refund.html
    • unholyangel
    • By unholyangel 19th Aug 17, 10:32 PM
    • 11,607 Posts
    • 8,739 Thanks
    unholyangel
    • #6
    • 19th Aug 17, 10:32 PM
    • #6
    • 19th Aug 17, 10:32 PM
    Paypal....they don't always break the chain btw. I'll try explain as best I can.

    In order for s75 to apply, there needs to be a debtor > creditor > supplier agreement.

    Now sometimes when using paypal, this chain can be broken as you effectively use your credit card to pay money into your paypal account and then use that balance to pay the company. You basically bought £x amount of paypal funds with your credit card rather than paying for the goods.

    However, if paypal act as nothing more than a merchant acquirer for the merchant, that should be covered. This would be where the money was paid directly to the merchant (even if it was paid into their paypal account, its really no different to paying it into their natwest account).

    Basically paypals role isn't always the same. It depends on the individual steps taken but if you're saying it was a card terminal and you never logged onto paypal, imo theres a good chance they were just acting as an acquirer and don't break the chain.


    Ask santander to reconsider, file a complaint at the financial ombudsman (and appeal if initially rejected). Worst case scenario you might need to go to court and name both the company & santander as defendants.
    Money doesn't solve poverty.....it creates it.
    • ukstreets
    • By ukstreets 20th Aug 17, 8:58 AM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    ukstreets
    • #7
    • 20th Aug 17, 8:58 AM
    • #7
    • 20th Aug 17, 8:58 AM
    Thank you for the quick responses. You have brightened my morning. I gave my credit card to the kitchen fitter he put it into a card reader and I entered my pin code, I did not log into paypal at all. My card statement showed a pp_ before the kitchen fitters companies name.

    The two news articles appear to have used exactly the same method of payment as myself. I am very disappointed with Santander as it must be aware of these card readers and how they work. I should not have to explain to them the mechanics of a card reader transaction in order to protect my consumer rights having used their card in good faith, especially when they have never warned me as a customer that my rights could be at risk in certain situations.
    • photome
    • By photome 20th Aug 17, 9:21 AM
    • 12,842 Posts
    • 8,313 Thanks
    photome
    • #8
    • 20th Aug 17, 9:21 AM
    • #8
    • 20th Aug 17, 9:21 AM
    Who is the kitchen company, although I understand you may not want to name until you get it sorted.

    Would be good to name them at some point though
    • ukstreets
    • By ukstreets 20th Aug 17, 2:42 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    ukstreets
    • #9
    • 20th Aug 17, 2:42 PM
    • #9
    • 20th Aug 17, 2:42 PM
    I don't want to name the company at this time as I don't want to undermine any future action I take. I will name the company in the future as they are worthy of a TV bodge job and charge more investigation show.
    • IAmWales
    • By IAmWales 20th Aug 17, 2:50 PM
    • 1,864 Posts
    • 3,883 Thanks
    IAmWales
    I'm guessing Wren. If it is then you'll find lots of other complaints about them.
    • ukstreets
    • By ukstreets 20th Aug 17, 6:11 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    ukstreets
    No it is not Wren. The company had a lot of positive reviews which gave us confidence but when I looked deeper it appears the positive reviews are all bogus and are intended to hide bad reviews.
    • theonlywayisup
    • By theonlywayisup 20th Aug 17, 6:31 PM
    • 11,444 Posts
    • 7,716 Thanks
    theonlywayisup
    As per post 6.

    I own a company and use Paypal as my merchant provider - they clear some payments made to my company. Those payments are NOTHING to do with Paypal and the break in the chain regarding Section 75.

    You need to go back Santander and tell them you paid using their card in a machine and input the PIN for your Santander card.
    • ukstreets
    • By ukstreets 21st Aug 17, 10:23 AM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    ukstreets
    As per post 6.

    You need to go back Santander and tell them you paid using their card in a machine and input the PIN for your Santander card.
    Originally posted by theonlywayisup
    In my appeal to Santanders decision I told them exactly that and they referred to their legal team who told me that they looked into the case in detail and do not see S75 applying as Paypal breaks the link. They have told me to go to the ombudsman. Is it worth going back to Santander again based on the news about Barclaycard and MBNA both now accepting the paypal card reader as qualifying for S75.
    • eddddy
    • By eddddy 21st Aug 17, 11:07 AM
    • 5,552 Posts
    • 5,235 Thanks
    eddddy
    Is it worth going back to Santander again based on the news about Barclaycard and MBNA both now accepting the paypal card reader as qualifying for S75.
    Originally posted by ukstreets
    It might be helpful to get a copy of the FOS decision about MBNA (rather than just the news stories).

    The FOS normally publish their decisions here: http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk

    But this one doesn't seem to be there yet. Which? published their article in July 2017, so it may be a recent decision that takes a while to get onto the FOS website.

    Maybe if you phone the FOS, they might be able to send you a copy of the MBNA S75 decision.
    See: http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/contact/index.html
    • theonlywayisup
    • By theonlywayisup 21st Aug 17, 3:01 PM
    • 11,444 Posts
    • 7,716 Thanks
    theonlywayisup
    In my appeal to Santanders decision I told them exactly that and they referred to their legal team who told me that they looked into the case in detail and do not see S75 applying as Paypal breaks the link. They have told me to go to the ombudsman. Is it worth going back to Santander again based on the news about Barclaycard and MBNA both now accepting the paypal card reader as qualifying for S75.
    Originally posted by ukstreets
    You need to be firm with them and explain that Paypal was the merchant provider the seller used and not something the buyer *you used. There was no break in the link.

    Merchant account providers give businesses the ability to accept debit and credit cards in payment for goods and services. Paypal are both a merchant provider and an online e-wallet. You did not use the e-wallet and as a buyer you generally have no idea who the seller uses as a merchant provider.
    • m0bov
    • By m0bov 21st Aug 17, 3:13 PM
    • 1,147 Posts
    • 768 Thanks
    m0bov
    If you feel you were mislead and felt you were paying the kitchen fitters and NOT paypal, could you report the transaction as fraud? I would be miffed if it we're me. Tell Santander (who have been poor with me in the past re S75s) that were mislead and were not told about paying a third party.
    • ukstreets
    • By ukstreets 21st Sep 17, 8:51 AM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    ukstreets
    I sent the information about the FOS ruling published in Which?Money and also the Telegraph article with the statement from Barclays and Santander said that they were sticking to their position and they do not see my claim as valid as PayPal in the view of their legal department breaks the chain.

    So now it is time to go to the Financial Ombudsmen and hope that they stand by their previous findings in the cases that have been detailed in the thread.
    • ukstreets
    • By ukstreets 6th Dec 17, 12:47 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    ukstreets
    Just a short update on what is happening:
    The FoS investigator spent weeks taking information from both myself and Santander and decided that there was no break in the chain and a Section 75 claim would be valid. They suggested that Santander arrange for the correct door and drawers to be provided and the incorrect ones to be collected. They also said that Santander arrange for an independent survey to be carried out listing all of the faults and then I should obtain three quotes to remedy the issues found on the survey and Santander would have to pay for one of them. The FoS investigator also said that Santander should compensate me for delaying the investigation £120.
    Satander has rejected this insisting that there is a break in the chain, that there is no evidence that I had not ordered what was supplied and also that they should not have to pay any compensation.

    So now it has to go for a final decision with an ombudsman. Hugely disappointed is an understatement and now I have to hope that the Ombudsman views everything the same way as their investigator.
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

1,677Posts Today

7,134Users online

Martin's Twitter