Car bought on Credit card

wattsy1

Can someone please help in this matter.
My father-in-law bought me and my wife a car on his credit card in November 2010, we noticed a problem with it a short while after buying it, but have not done anything about it because i work a lot of the time out of the counrty, however after reading this site i think there maybe something i can do? there is a fault with the car which is going to cost in excess of £500 to repair, as the cost of the part alone is £500 from Landrover dealership. can we claim from either the retailer or from the credit card company as it is within the 6 month limit at the moment, and who would be our "first port of call" so to speak, please help with this someone as we need to sell the car soon as it's costing too much to run with the rising cost of fuel at the moment. thank you people :-)

Regards Ian

mo786uk

Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act applies.

What this means is that the credit card company are jointly liable for any breach of contract. Therefore if the shop is not honouring your rights you can go to the card company. There is no onus to go to the retailer to start with but common sense says you should go to the retailer first.

It doesn't give you EXTRA rights per se.......

What you need to do is read up on the Sale of Goods Act and decide whether you have any rights to start with.

2nd hand cars are notoriously difficult to deal with because its near on impossible to know what the car was like when you bought it.

You need to find out what the problem is, was it caused by reasonable wear and tear or was it a fault the retailer didn;t tell you about? The fact that you have left it late wont help because the shop will probably just say you caused the fault.

The credit card company can also apply their own legal view to the problem and if they think the shop is in the right then they won;t help you either.

VfM4meplse

mo786uk wrote: »

Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act applies.

Agreed - a point well made in this month's Which? Money magazine.

CoolHotCold

Wow, please read the Section 75, you will find out it does not apply in this case.

mo786uk

why is that?

CoolHotCold

Because the FIL purchased the car on credit card, Wattsy cannot claim via credit card (depending how documents are worded his FIL might be able to).

Essentially (though not written in law but ruled by the Financial Ombudsman) in this case the FIL has to prove significant benefit, he cannot purchase a car and give as a gift. He has to gain benifit of the item (car) in order to use Section 75, so if the car is in Wattsy's name he isn't covered by Section 75.

(see 62/02)

mo786uk

CoolHotCold wrote: »

Because the FIL purchased the car on credit card, Wattsy cannot claim via credit card (depending how documents are worded his FIL might be able to).

Essentially (though not written in law but ruled by the Financial Ombudsman) in this case the FIL has to prove significant benefit, he cannot purchase a car and give as a gift. He has to gain benifit of the item (car) in order to use Section 75, so if the car is in Wattsy's name he isn't covered by Section 75.

(see 62/02)

Yes, but the obvious thing to do is for FIL to take it up with the retailer/card company

shaun_from_Africa

There is one further point to consider.

I remember reading a while back that some sect 75 claims were denied by the card issuer because of the fact that the goods in question had been purchased for other people, hence the card holder was not the legal owner of them, and therefore had no legal right of dispute.

If the debtor under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement falling within section 12(b) or (c) has, in relation to a transaction financed by the agreement, 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.

They basically said that sect 75 (above) clearly states that the dispute must be between the debtor (buyer) and supplier, but if the debtor is not the legal owner of the goods, they no longer have the right to dispute against the supplier.


This is one of the cases.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2810034

We claimed from HSBC Mastercard for the return of our expenditure (£1726) under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

After initially crediting the credit account with the full amount, HSBC are now saying that we don't have a right to any refund since the expenditure was to the benefit of a third party and so we can't demonstrate a valid 'debtor/creditor/supplier' agreement.

CoolHotCold

mo786uk,if the car is in Wattsy's name the chain of supply is broken, therefore section 75 does not apply. The FIL cannot claim for something he doesn't "own" or use or derive any benefit from(must be significant not giving a lift every so often), Wattsy should however be able to go to the retailer though and get it sorted.

wattsy1

My FIL bought the car for us so we can get to them if they need us, as he has has strokes and MIL has Arthritis vary bad and is disabled because of it, so it is beefiting my FIL in that case, also to note that the registered keeper of a vehicle is not necessarily the legal owner, so... my FIL owns that car but it is registered in my name and will remain as such until i have paid him the money back for the car, complicated i know but hey there it is lol, i was intending to take back the garage where the car was bought, and, if we get no joy from them will advise FIL to contact the card company. we don't want money back for the car but what we do want is for the cost of the replacement part to be 'taken care of', i was going to pay for it myself until i saw this site and wondered...can i???, i hope this a little clearer for you guys. thank you for the advice so far, but after reading the Sect75 it says that generally speaking you have up to 6 months after the purchase, is this correct in this case?
Cheers wattsy1

mo786uk

can you expand as to why you think the shop should pay for the repair?

if the shop have a valid reason for refusing then the card company wont do anything.

the 6 months period relates to who has to prove the fault - I suggest you read up on the Sale of Goods Act 1979.