Card Protection Charge

TyDavies

An unrecognised 'CARD PROTECTION' Charge has appeared on my (unused) MINT credit card. After 20mins I got through to MINT who said I must ring the CARD PROTECTION people to arrange a refund. I called and asked to cancel but was refused as the original recurring annual transaction was in my wife's name. I gave the 'phone to my wife who attempted to cancel the service but she was refused as the transaction date was 17th Oct and we were therefore outside the refund period. The original transaction was made by my wife on a Debenhams Card. I am the primary Card holder on the MINT card with an additional card for my wife. My wife's Debenhams card was replaced a few months ago following some fraudulent transactions.
As all our cards are registered with this card protection company they have used an 'autopay' agreement to place the charge on my card. Surely this can't be right!

YorkshireBoy

You don't say who your wife has the contract with, but here's what CPP say about renewals...

We will collect the payment from the card or account that the main policyholder has identified as the paycard or paying account. Following a loss report, or if a payment is rejected from your paycard, payments will be collected from any other card you have registered on your policy.

http://www.cpp.co.uk/termsandconditions/termsAndConditionsUKCardV3Default/

I'm sure Sentinel's T&Cs will say the same.

jonesMUFCforever

If I have read your post correctly the card protection company have debited your Mint card instead of your wife's Debenhams card?
If that is correct it is fraud pure and simple - contact Mint and insist that they refund.
Nobody has a right to swap a CPA from one card to another (in another person's name).
I would suggest to Yorkshire Boy that the clause you refer to would be unfair in contract law and IMO in contravention of the DPA.

YorkshireBoy

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

I would suggest to Yorkshire Boy that the clause you refer to would be unfair in contract law and IMO in contravention of the DPA.

His wife was a secondary cardholder on the Mint account and, as such, was authorised to make charges to the account (via, as it's turned out, the protection T&Cs).

OP's wife wanted the cover to continue because she didn't cancel the policy when the renewal notice came through. They'd have been screaming blue murder if the policy hadn't been renewed and they'd subsequently lost out through loss/fraud etc.

TyDavies

YorkshireBoy thanks for the reply and Yes the company is CPP. Powerful Ts & Cs, are they really legally binding. Out of interest, we haven't received any renewal notice and we are careful with our mail. Nevertheless I expect like energy suppliers they deem that mail has been recieved once they have posted it. It's clear that this type of recurring payment is not for me as I expect ALL companies to be reasonable in their dealings with customers.
Niave or what!

jonesMUFCforever, thanks too, I prefer your reply as, to me, it makes more sense - but I have no legal background. I'll try MINT out on the fraud angle and see what happens. I'll keep in touch. Meanwhile I'll investigate any existing recurrent CC payments and hopefully cancel them.

nomorerack

Good thing i have read this thread, a friend of mind recommended that i get one for myself. Because of the information i read here i'm gonna have to learn their ropes with a fine toothed comb...Thanks a lot.

jonesMUFCforever

TyDavies wrote: »

YorkshireBoy thanks for the reply and Yes the company is CPP. Powerful Ts & Cs, are they really legally binding. Out of interest, we haven't received any renewal notice and we are careful with our mail. Nevertheless I expect like energy suppliers they deem that mail has been recieved once they have posted it. It's clear that this type of recurring payment is not for me as I expect ALL companies to be reasonable in their dealings with customers.
Niave or what!

jonesMUFCforever, thanks too, I prefer your reply as, to me, it makes more sense - but I have no legal background. I'll try MINT out on the fraud angle and see what happens. I'll keep in touch. Meanwhile I'll investigate any existing recurrent CC payments and hopefully cancel them.

I would suggest you contact CPP first and ask them under the Data protection Act how they can justify using ''data ie information they are supposed to protect'' in order to line their pockets.

TyDavies

Thanks again

I would suggest you contact CPP first and ask them under the Data protection Act how they can justify using ''data ie information they are supposed to protect'' in order to line their pockets.

but if the conversation was anything like my call yesterday it will revolve around "it's in the terms you can't get a refund under any circumstances". I'd prefer to talk to MINT about possible fraud, you never know they might be reasonable. It's clear CCP want to keep their money regardless of the cost. What goes around comes around

jonesMUFCforever

TyDavies wrote: »

Thanks again but if the conversation was anything like my call yesterday it will revolve around "it's in the terms you can't get a refund under any circumstances". I'd prefer to talk to MINT about possible fraud, you never know they might be reasonable. It's clear CCP want to keep their money regardless of the cost. What goes around comes around

Threaten to report them to the Data commissioner or get one of the financial reporters in one of the Daily newspapers to have a look at the case.
That ''might'' make them change their mind?

dirtmother

Is there any real value in having a CPP policy? I have had one for years, renews every three years and it is due but I no longer have so many bits of plastic and the record is out of date and I am wondering whether to just cancel and just take more responsibility for keeping a note of the numbers to notify for stolen cards?