Section 75 Claim Against Multiple Creditcards

bingo_bango

Thanks for coming back with a sensible update. It's a pity a few more on here wouldn't do the same.

GKWelding

bingo_bango wrote: »

Thanks for coming back with a sensible update. It's a pity a few more on here wouldn't do the same.

No problem, this forum has helped no end with this claim so I thought it was at least worth an update with the outcome. Plus it was difficult to find out an answer to the question I had about multiple cards, this now ranks top on google for that query so I hope it helps someone else.

fthl

GKWelding wrote: »

The company can choose to offer you what they want as full and final settlement, this is true, and you have the right to accept it. However, if it then goes to their legal team and they make a decision, the only thing they can offer you under S75 is a refund. Any other offer of repair/replacement comes from the company as full and final settlement. Maybe I should have expanded on this a little more in my original post.

Sorry. I still disagree. You are entitled to pursue any contractual remedy and a court could award any viable remedy, from specific performance to a repair, replacement, compensation to a full refund.

See s75(1):

"If the debtor... has... any claim against the supplier in respect of a

misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor"

Your legal rights under s75 and any offer a company might want to make you are different matters.

PZH

fthl wrote: »

Sorry. I still disagree. You are entitled to pursue any contractual remedy and a court could award any viable remedy, from specific performance to a repair, replacement, compensation to a full refund.

See s75(1):

"If the debtor... has... any claim against the supplier in respect of a

misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor"

Your legal rights under s75 and any offer a company might want to make you are different matters.

So GKWelding is saying that a s75 claim WILL result in a refund and you're saying a s75 claim will result in whatever the creditor decides (be it Refund, repair or replace) ?

fthl

Not quite:

GKW stated "the only thing they can offer you under S75 is a refund."

In fact they can offer you anything they like. Beyond this, in law they are obligated to provide a refund, replacement, repair and/or compensation, depending on the circumstances. A s75 claim can result in any remedy due to the claimant under misrep or contract. It is nothing do do with what the creditor wants, it is down to your legal entitlement. A full refund will only be due in limited circumstances, as is the case under the SoGA or the Misrep Act.

CoolHotCold

See http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/31/creditcards-31.htm


Particularly

Section 75 does not, in itself, provide grounds for a claim against a supplier. Customers must have a valid claim of breach of contract or misrepresentation under other law, such as the Sale of Goods Act or the Misrepresentation Act. If they do, then they have a like claim against the card provider for the full amount of the claim.

To me that sounds like you are entitled to a refund for the entire amount paid, forfeiting any goods received.

So, for example, a customer who pays a deposit for goods – using a credit card issued by firm A – and then pays the balance using firm B’s card, has the choice of claiming for the cost of goods and any consequental losses against:

the supplier of the goods;
firm A;
firm B; or
all three.
But of course, the customer cannot recover the same money twice.

Seems like they answered your original question.

fthl

with the caveat that 'the full amount of your claim' might not be a full refund. It might just be a few quid in comp, or the cost of a repair, depending on the circumstances.

unholyangel

I've never had to use section 75 myself but i was under the impression that it gives the customer the same entitlement with the card company as they have/would have had with the retailer.

So it would have been my assumption (whether right or wrong) that the card company can offer a repair/replacement depending on the specific situation.

PZH

unholyangel wrote: »

I've never had to use section 75 myself...

No, me neither. But I assumed it was a last resort "chargeback" (probably the wrong wording). Hence my question just to try and clarify. :beer:

fthl

i was under the impression that it gives the customer the same entitlement with the card company as they have/would have had with the retailer.

Yep.

But I assumed it was a last resort "chargeback" (probably the wrong wording).

Chargeback is a different mechanism, it is scheme offered by some cards in addition to s75 rights and has its own rules, for eg a 120 day limitation period whereas under s75 you have 6 years (in E&W). S75 claims don't have to be a last resort either, sometimes it can be an efficient first resort.