We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Question about Section 75
davec6550
Posts: 3 Newbie
in Credit cards
Hi All,
As we all know, when spending over £100 on a credit card, the credit card issuer has a liability if the goods are not delivered because the shop has gone bust.
But what about when paying for something that will be delivered bit by bit over time?
An Example:
Bob wants to buy 10 hours of driving lessons with BeeSM, it is cheaper to pay for 10 hours in one go that to pay for each hour separately, the lessons are £25 an hour or £200 for 10 hours.
Sensibly Bob decides to pay for the 10 hours in one go using a credit card, to take advantage of the Section 75 protection.
After Bob has had 5 hours of driving lessons, BeeSM goes bust!!!
Which of the following would be correct:
1) Bob gets half his money back form his credit card company because he had only used half of his 'product'.
2) Bob gets the whole £200 back from the credit card company because not all of what he had paid for had been delivered.
3) Bob gets nothing back.
Any Ideas???
Many Thanks
Dave
As we all know, when spending over £100 on a credit card, the credit card issuer has a liability if the goods are not delivered because the shop has gone bust.
But what about when paying for something that will be delivered bit by bit over time?
An Example:
Bob wants to buy 10 hours of driving lessons with BeeSM, it is cheaper to pay for 10 hours in one go that to pay for each hour separately, the lessons are £25 an hour or £200 for 10 hours.
Sensibly Bob decides to pay for the 10 hours in one go using a credit card, to take advantage of the Section 75 protection.
After Bob has had 5 hours of driving lessons, BeeSM goes bust!!!
Which of the following would be correct:
1) Bob gets half his money back form his credit card company because he had only used half of his 'product'.
2) Bob gets the whole £200 back from the credit card company because not all of what he had paid for had been delivered.
3) Bob gets nothing back.
Any Ideas???
Many Thanks
Dave
0
Comments
-
Or potentially option 4) Bob gets half his money back form his credit card company because he had only used half of his 'product' + claims £25 consequential loss in order to purchase 5 lessons from a rival (assuming they use the same pricing)0
-
Thanks Dazza,
I think as long as I still have fair protection I'd be happy!
Dave0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 246.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.2K Life & Family
- 260.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards