Help guidance please, Section 75 or Service not received claim

SJMS_2

Hello, during holiday in France my car broke down and was repaired by towed away and repaired.
We collected the car £270 the worse off only for the car to break down an hour later, same fault. Again the the garage tried to repair the car and admitted they couldn't repair it.

Another garage fixed the fault and told us the first repair wasn't necessary.

We are in the process of trying to claim the money back through Barclay Mastercard complaint for service not received.

Can anyone advise is this the best approach and will we loose any right to claim via section 75?

or,

should we just claim via section 75?

Thanks for reading.

dazza.mk

?? You would be using Section 75 to hold Barclaycard liable for the Service not received, there aren't 2 separate claim routes (or am I missing something).

You'll probably need independent proof (from an independent expert) that the initial repairs were unwarranted. Start may be the second garage unless the above was purely word of mouth.

SJMS_2

dazza.mk wrote: »

?? You would be using Section 75 to hold Barclaycard liable for the Service not received, there aren't 2 separate claim routes (or am I missing something).

You'll probably need independent proof (from an independent expert) that the initial repairs were unwarranted. Start may be the second garage unless the above was purely word of mouth.

Thanks for the quick reply and you have cleared section 75 question up for me.

At this time Barclaycard have said they will try to claim the money back. We have a receipt for the work carried which has a brief explanation of the fault being an electrical connection that prevented the diesel pump from operating.

The first garage replaced the pump and then refused to re-install the original.

dazza.mk

That they will 'try' to get the money back sounds like they aren't treating it like a Section 75 claim.

It sounds however like you've purely got a receipt for the second repair rather than anything backing up your case that the first repair was carried out incorrectly/was unnecessary?