Money Moral Dilemma: Should Tash split the compensation cash?

Former_MSE_Archna

Here's this week's hypothetical situation for you to cogitate on:

Should Tash split the compensation cash?

Best buds Natasha and Elena decide to visit Las Vegas, so Elena hands over her £300 air fare and Natasha pays the total by credit card. Yet the airline goes into administration and under Section 75 rules Natasha can only reclaim her own fare as Elena’s not family. Elena says she's due half the refund, but Tash thinks not as Elena doesn't even have a credit card so wouldn't been protected either way.

Should Tash split the compensation cash?
Click reply to have your say

Previous MMDs:

View all

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

bumpoowee

Yes she should. Ok from a legal point of view she has no obligation to - however to a normal person the way the money is refunded is a technicality. The situation is basically this:

1. two tickets paid for on credit card
2. half the money is refunded

She wouldn't be much of a friend if she said 'well section 75 of the credit card thingy act says legally only my ticket is covered so i'm keeping all the money'.

scotsbob

Whose money covered under section 75?... Natashas
Who got refund ......Natasha.
Who does money belong to?...Natasha

Simple really .


.

HairY

If I was Natasha I would have simply told Elena that the credit card company refused to pay the refund.

tomstickland

The honourable thing to do would be to split it.

WhyIsSavingSoHard

I'ld like to think I'd split it if I were Natasha. She risks loosing a friend over it if not and good friends are priceless. Then again, if Natasha doesn't want to split it, what sort of friend is she?

tomwakefield

I can see the point about splitting it, but if I was Natasha I'd be cheesed off about it.

If Natasha had paid just for her own ticket, she'd have got a refund of the full amount and not lost anything. Why should she lose the protection of her own money just because she's doing a friend a favour?

standland

By using her card to book for her friend Natasha was in effect halving her protection. If she was aware that this was the case then she would give half the refund to her friend as she accepted the lower level of protection and extended some protection to her friend then she should give half the money.

However it is Natasha's money that is refunded not her friends.

My view is that Natasha if she is a good friend should offer half the money to her friend, and her friend if she is also a good one should refuse it on the grounds that she is not entitled to it. Natasha will feel good because she got all her money back and offered half to her friend and her friend will feel good because she did the right thing by not causing her friend to lose out just because she did them a favour.

RobotB

Usually when I read these moral dilemmas I have a clear opinion as to what is right and wrong but for once I can see both sides of this argument.It clearly is Natasha's money that is being refunded but friendship should be valued higher than £150.......

geri1965_2

Hmmm, I didn't realise that this was the case. So if I pay for a holiday for me & my OH and the company goes bust, do I only get half the money back? Or does it apply to tickets only as they are booked in individual names?

Frenchlady_2

I have found myself in similar situations and have always thought that it was the fair thing to do to share the refund. However, guess what, when the boot is on the other foot - do I get a share? Yes you are right I don't. I sometimes think that I am one of the world's biggest mugs - or alternatively I just choose friends badly!!