NEED HELP!!! Problem with Barclaycard!

Janie4Now

I didn't get the impression that the OP was trying to get away with anything.

I know exactly how they feel because I was just as livid when it happened to me.

The only way to get this money back is to take it up with the car rental company and hope that they will refund the money. The original hire agreement will have stipulated that the hire company can debit any repair expenses from the credit card. Trying to get them to acknowledge that any repairs are NOT the responsibility of the OP will be difficult though not impossible.

dalesrider

Janie4Now wrote: »

The only way to get this money back is to take it up with the car rental company and hope that they will refund the money.

No, your card provider can help if the hire co has not followed the regulations. They have signed into with Visa/Mastercard.

They basicly charged me for fixing the car which they shouldn've done as it wasn't my fault

A very ambiguous statement. Which I would take to mean. There was some damage, but not caused by the OP. But could just as easily mean they had no knowdledge of.

Janie4Now

Dalesrider - the OP knows about the repairs (they are under query) and so she has been notified of them. She authorised the hire company to charge her Barclaycard account when she signed the initial agreement. Her only hope here is to convince the hire company that she should not be charged and for
them to reimburse her Barclaycard.

I know this because I have been through this precise scenario myself and investigated every possible avenue at the time (mine was a great deal more money, so trust me, I looked at every angle). Like the OP I couldn't believe it was legal, either.

OP - what was the damage and how wasn't it your fault? We tried to prove negligence on the part of the hire company but failed.... with hindsight, we would have been better pushing the wretched thing off the cliff instead of getting it back to the hire company!

chattychappy

Janie4Now wrote: »

I know this because I have been through this precise scenario myself and investigated every possible avenue at the time

Did you go to court and get a judgment? Did you go to the FOS?

Though the chargeback mechanism doesn't give direct rights to a cardholder (it's a process the CC can use via the network to recover from the merchant), the FOS has held that CCs should use it to assist cardholders where possible. So if the merchant hasn't complied with their merchant obligations in the way they processed the charge to the detriment of the cardholder, then the CC should take it up on behalf of the OP. If they don't, then there are grounds for complaint.

That's in addition to using s75 (if applicable) or simply disputing on the grounds that the charge wasn't authorised. If disputed, the onus is on the CC to prove that the transaction was authorised rather than on the cardholder that it wasn't. (It probably was, but that depends on what was agreed at the time.)

meer53

If the OP knows that the debit is for damage to the car, it's pointless the CC issuer doing a chargeback as it will simply reject with documents from the hire company with this information. They will also provide an authorisation from the OP in the form of a copy of their signed t & c's, accepting any subsequent debits. They should also provide a copy of the bill for any repairs done. If they don't supply this then the OP may have a case to pursue it further. Only the CC issuer can tell them what they should do next.

Janie4Now

chattychappy wrote: »

Did you go to court and get a judgment? Did you go to the FOS?

Though the chargeback mechanism doesn't give direct rights to a cardholder (it's a process the CC can use via the network to recover from the merchant), the FOS has held that CCs should use it to assist cardholders where possible. So if the merchant hasn't complied with their merchant obligations in the way they processed the charge to the detriment of the cardholder, then the CC should take it up on behalf of the OP. If they don't, then there are grounds for complaint.

That's in addition to using s75 (if applicable) or simply disputing on the grounds that the charge wasn't authorised. If disputed, the onus is on the CC to prove that the transaction was authorised rather than on the cardholder that it wasn't. (It probably was, but that depends on what was agreed at the time.)

I took some very heavy duty legal advice because I couldn't believe it could happen. But it is perfectly legal. The charge was authorised under the terms of the Hire agreement and the OP will have to prove that s/he was not responsible for the repairs. Unless the Hire company has acted illegally or against the terms of their agreement with Barclaycard, which they have not as far as we know, then Barclaycard have no part to play in this.

chattychappy

meer53 wrote: »

They should also provide a copy of the bill for any repairs done.

and evidence that the repairs were necessary as a result of damage for which the OP is liable.... (contemporaneous records/photos/correspondence etc.)

Janie4Now

chattychappy wrote: »

and evidence that the repairs were necessary as a result of damage for which the OP is liable.... (contemporaneous records/photos/correspondence etc.)

They only have to prove that there was damage to the car that wasn't there when the OP rented it and that that damage isn't covered by whatever insurance the OP took out.

dalesrider

Janie4Now wrote: »

Dalesrider - the OP knows about the repairs (they are under query) and so she has been notified of them. She authorised the hire company to charge her Barclaycard account when she signed the initial agreement. Her only hope here is to convince the hire company that she should not be charged and for
them to reimburse her Barclaycard.

I know this because I have been through this precise scenario myself and investigated every possible avenue at the time !

I wasn't even aware of it untill I checked my account and realised I was over my limit by £300!!!!

I think we don't have the full story here.

I take the above to mean that the OP did not know about the damage and that he then contacted the hire co re the debit. And has since found out what it relates too.

So come on OP. Give use the full story, not just selected bits that make us guess...:T

At the moment all BC could do is order the voucher to see what the debit is for.
Which clearly we know from the posts is damage.
Now if the Op still has the forms from when picking up and dropping off the car whcih show any damage. And these prove that he did not damage the car. Then BC can c/b the trans. If he does not then. The only option is as you did fight the hire co.
The other way is as I said before.
If the OP has not recieved notification of the charge. Then there is a precompliance error. Which allows BC to contest the charge on the basis of failure by the hire co to follow the regulations.
But if the hire have done this. Then the Op is again back to the hire co to resolve.

S75 will not apply here as there has been no breech of contract/missrepresentation. As the OP signes the T/C when they picked up the car. Which as you say gives them the right to charge the card if they feel the damage was caused by the OP.

Working car hire disputes is a nightmare as people do not keep paperwork, or even get it when picking up or returning cars. If no one around then photos of the car can help... Car dropped at airport, and some idiot hits it after parking up.... Ah you have proof it was OK when left. Nice one.
All simple things that can make cases like this so much easier to fight.

So come on OP. Give us the full run down on if you knew about the damage or not. If you did. Did you take the damage waiver?

Janie4Now

Dalesrider - I read it that the OP knew about the damage and was already discussing the situation with the hire company.

Like you say, we need more information.