Credit card claim, who claims?

Ialwaysgetdone

It is correct as stated above about the principle cardholder but it's usually only in extreme cases that they won't cough up as pointed out here

http://www.which.co.uk/advice/your-rights-when-paying-by-credit-card/your-rights/index.jsp

Additional cardholders

If your partner has a credit card and has added you as an additional cardholder, it's usually best to get the main cardholder (your partner) to make any big purchases, rather than using the extra card yourself. Several credit card companies have taken the view that section 75 does not apply if a purchase made on an additional card does not benefit the main cardholder.
When section 75 may not apply

For example, a wife buys some land using a credit card. She is the secondary cardholder on a credit card account in the sole name of her husband. The land is registered in her name because she bought it for herself as a development project. The land turns out to have been misrepresented by the seller. The wife's claim against the credit card company under Section 75 is unlikely to succeed as the land is not for the cardholder's benefit, in this case her husband.
When section 75 does apply

In contrast, take the example of a husband and wife buying a holiday club membership in joint names. The wife makes the purchase using her secondary cardholder card on the husband's credit card account. They say that the nature of the membership was misrepresented to them and the husband claims against the credit card provider under section 75. In this case section 75 does apply - the husband is a party to the joint purchase and will benefit from it, so section 75 applies even though they used the wife's card instead of the husband's to pay for the membership.
How to avoid section 75 confusion

While some credit card companies say they will treat section 75 claims from an additional cardholder in the same way as they would if the cardholder him- or herself had complained, other cases have been taken to the Financial Ombudsman Service for a ruling, with some going against the consumer. To avoid the inconvenience and uncertainty of a lengthy dispute with your credit card provider, avoid using the additional card for large purchases - it's better to get the cardholder to pay for the transaction, or get a credit card account in your own name

moonrakerz

derrick wrote: »

so if you lend your card to a family member,

I very much doubt if this would be covered - something about not divulging your PIN to anyone else springs to mind !! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

derrick

Quote:
Originally Posted by derrick
so if you lend your card to a family member,

moonrakerz wrote: »

I very much doubt if this would be covered - something about not divulging your PIN to anyone else springs to mind !! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

And the full post is :-

derrick wrote: »

Paying by CC

"You may have your work cut out: -

"Purchases must be made by the ‘principal cardholder’, so if you lend your card to a family member, or a secondary cardholder makes a purchase, these won’t be covered".

Which is what that post said:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

moonrakerz

derrick wrote: »

Quote:
Originally Posted by derrick
so if you lend your card to a family member,





And the full post is :-




Which is what that post said:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

The point I was try to make (not very well, re-reading my post !) was that a second card holder is not covered by the Law, as was said; letting someone else use your card is a definite no-no (as strictly speaking it would not be a valid transaction)

:o

Ialwaysgetdone

:cool: my most recent post was to point out that a second card holder more than likely WILL be covered except in extreme cases.

You don't need a PIN to buy from t'internet