Section 75 refunds - article discussion

selbjx

selbjx wrote: »

I wonder if anyone could give me some advice on the following situation. Its not 100% straight forward but then again I suppose what is.

We recently purchased and had installed a carpet from a national franchised retailer, which wasn't overly expensive as we deem it a short term purchased until we can afford to install wood throughout.

We picked the carpet, spoke to the sales assistant (also franchise owner) about buying our own underlay as they charge the earth and he advised what would be suitable for the carpet and so we purchased the carpet and arranged a fitting date.

The fitting day came, (we had laid the underlay as we purchased elsewhere, but to the spec advised and this had been checked by the fitters and deemed fine prior to cutting and laying). The carpet went down and looked great. By the time my better half had returned the carpet was looking baggy and unstretched.

We promptly called the firm who returned advising and discovered the door bars had not been fixed down and were all refitted. Also pointed out was a 'pluck' in a prominent place and the stair carpet was creased in placed. They did some more work and left.

The carpet again became baggy and a slip on a loose stair carpet very nearly led to a fall. Again another call followed by another visit and the replacement on several steps carpet from remnant I had left over. They also attempted to restretch the loose carpet.

We are now two weeks on, and the carpet in a very brightly lit room looks ok, but when the lights are out and other lights cast shadows over the carpet, the ripples are very apparent and it looks absolutely horrendous.

We are now struggling with the firm who are placing blame everywhere else but themselves, including the cold weather (29 degrees yesterday).

I have spoken to my card provider who are wrangling over a faulty product, arguably the carpet was not faulty. However the carpet fitters (although subcontractors of the firm) i would deem to have installed poorly, and thus faulty and as they were appointed by the firm and not myself then surely the liability is there, and the credit card company should see that.

I have no idea where i stand on this - something which should have been straight forward is now annoyingly stressful (other half likes a rant).

My ideal would be for the firm to resolve the issue, however the more the carpet is taken up and re-stretched, the more the edges become shabby looking. There is only so many times a carpet can be lifted without looking terrible, and i feel this may have now exceeded it.

Any pointers would be great.

Cheers

Jon

Any one have any thoughts on this?

KTM_Gordo

shopper150 wrote: »

I purchased a brand new vacuum cleaner in October using my Amex card.

I only started using it in Decemeber, and it is now faulty after only 2 weeks use.

The manufacturer is offering to repair it, but I would like a full refund.

Can I reject the goods and claim a refund? Do I use section 75?

Forget the manufacturer - your contract is with the retailer. No, you don't need S75 unless the retailer refuses to help.

Have a look for Martin's SAD FART guidance on the site to see what the retailer is required to do.

KTM_Gordo

selbjx wrote: »

Any one have any thoughts on this?

It sounds like the carpet may be faulty / not up to standard - contact the retailer as your contract is with them (I assume the fitters are working for them too).

selbjx

KTM_Gordo wrote: »

It sounds like the carpet may be faulty / not up to standard - contact the retailer as your contract is with them (I assume the fitters are working for them too).

Thanks for that, my card company are arguing that it would be deemed that the fitting was poorly executed, and that although a total of £200 was put on my card and the remaining paid cash, that the fitting fee was only £90 and so does not come under section 75 which i think seems wrong. They also argue that one persons interpretation of bad quality would be ok in someone elses opinion so is open to interpretation.They have also said in terms of if the arrangement it is usual that terms and conditions would indicate my fitting contract is with the fitter (who i had no say in) not the supplier and to look on my receipt... my next problem, the receipt i have is a photo copy (my own fault i left the store with the Credit Card receipt but not their bill/terms - after going back they couldn't find it and so gave me a photo copy of their copy.

The firms fitters I believe are sub contractors but at no point have i chosen them and when i request a different fitter, they sent someone else. If it helps they came in company branded vans.

The last visit by their fitter (yesterday) they advised there was nothing they could do about the remaining bubbles as they had glued the carpet to the underlay so the bubble was effectively trapped (like the annoying bubbles when you fit phone protector screens) and also said to me that the carpet isn't appropriate for the areas it has been installed due to high footfall, yet in the shop the banners say suitable for x, y and z, even the salesman said it (i guess anything to clintch a sale).

I'm lost now what to do, i've prospectively emailed Financial Services Ombudsman with my plight and see whether they consider it suitable under S75.

KTM_Gordo

Section 75 is a tool of last resort, and if you paid the retailer for the carpet and the fitting then they are jointly liable with the credit card company.

Have you gone to the retailer and told them what you've put above? That the fitters say the carpet isn't suitable for that location, but the signs in the shop says it is? Has the retailer been to look at the finished job?

It's always best to go directly to the party you dealt with as the first step - if the retailer doesn't want to know then you can take it to the next level, but start with them, not the fitters or the credit card company.

shopper150

KTM_Gordo wrote: »

Forget the manufacturer - your contract is with the retailer. No, you don't need S75 unless the retailer refuses to help.

Have a look for Martin's SAD FART guidance on the site to see what the retailer is required to do.

In my case, the retailer is the manufacturer. They want repair it, but I want a refund.

KTM_Gordo

Looking at this page: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange

After four weeks from purchase you should expect exchange, repair or part-refund. When you started using the item isn't relevant because it cannot be proved either way.

Rodge27

Hi, I've only just learnt about Section 75, however, in late 2007 I paid upfront for 2 LGV driver training courses on my credit card. I completed the first course but then the company went bust before I started the second course, leaving me about £1300 out of pocket. Do I still have a chance of getting my money back with it being such a long time ago and no longer having any of the paperwork from the training company.

Many thanks in advance for your help.

financial_ombudsman_representative

Hello Rodge 27.

I work for the Financial Ombudsman Service - the free service set up by law to sort out problems between consumers and financial businesses. There are time limits which apply when complaining but it sounds like you might be within those. However, if you want to make a claim under section 75, you should contact your credit card company in the first instance - and it is probably better to do this sooner rather than later. If you are unable to resolve this with the business directly, the ombudsman service might be able to help on 0300 123 9 123.

Thanks
Phillipa

bride2be12

Hi - I originally set out our situation in post #547. In brief my finance and I bought a loose diamond in New York's financial district which was set by the vendor in a white gold setting.

It transpired that the stone was clarity enhanced (this is marked on the receipt and on the grading certificate albeit in tiny type - much less obvious than all the other info on there!). We were not told orally that the stone was CE when we were looking at it and comparing it to others. We were only given the paper work after the sale concluded.

The fact it was CE was highlighted when we had the ring valued for insurance purposes but it was beautiful and I loved it so we took it no further. Fast forward 9 months approx and the stone has changed completely - it looks cloudy and grey. It seems that the enhancement has failed.

We have tried to deal with the vendor direct but have had no joy there save from a number of abusive phonecalls and emails from them.

So we tried s75 (my fiance paid for the ring on his Halifax Credit Card). We have just been told that the claim has been rejected as they do not know what has caused the enhancement to fail/degrade.

We obtained a report (at our expense but at the Halifax's request) from the valuer who did the original report. In this second report he says he doesn't know what has caused the problem but it might have been due to a heat source such as might be used when resizing the ring or when cleaning it with high pressure steam. He doesn't say that this is what has happened (and I can categorically say that the ring has never been resized or professionally cleaned - I'd only had it a few months after all!). However the Halifax has seized on his comments and are saying that because of this they are not obliged to pay.

He does confirm that the stone cannot be repaired.

In my view, we would be entitled to a refund under the SOGA if the transaction was in the UK so the same rules apply.

Our next step is to go to the Financial Ombudsman and I just wondered if anyone had any tips/advice about doing this or if they think the Halifax is right and we have no claim (and no engagement ring!).

Thanks in advance

B2B12