Section 75 claim

wp095231

Hi, have made a Section 75 claim to my credit card providers, following the fitting of some blackout blinds which have been fitted so close to the window recesses, day lights streams in the gaps.Despite trying to resolve this initially with the company themselves they have ignored my complaint. I sent photos and a detailed letter to my credit card provider but they are now asking for specific documentation from an expert or professional that supports my dispute about the level of quality of the goods.
Anyone know if this is a legitimate request, since they have the photos. I had a brief look at the legislation but couldn't see anything about submitting a professional opinion upholding my dispute alongside a claim.

consumer23

Hi There,

Unfortunately I have no idea about whether it is legitimate or not for them to ask for expert opinions etc. I recently made a section 75 claim which was turned down due to a third party being involved.

You may find the which? legal service of great use though. I took up their membership for £36.50 for one year and you get unlimited legal advice by email or phone from practicing solicitors and lawyers.

I would suggest you look into this as they do cover consumer issues.

hope this helps,
Peter

Crabman

If you have home insurance, a legal helpline is often provided with that, though it won't be as comprehensive as the Which legal helpline that consumer23 is referring to.

It can be difficult to get an independent opinion. Most companies don't want to get involved in disputes. If there are costs for obtaining an independent report, these should be added to your Section 75 claim.

If you've sent photos which clearly demonstrate the issue(s), that's evidence that they must consider. The FOS has case studies about Section 75 claims on their website so it may be worth you searching through those to see what the FOS does with this sort of case where photos are provided instead of an independent report.

chanz4

suppose they are asking for proof that its not correct, a lot of blinds dont go to the very edge

dalesrider

wp095231 wrote: »

Anyone know if this is a legitimate request, since they have the photos. I had a brief look at the legislation but couldn't see anything about submitting a professional opinion upholding my dispute alongside a claim.

Yes it is.
You card provider are not blind fitters. Therefor need independent advice to prove you are correct and the fitter has not done what was requested.
Remember you have to prove breach of contract and misrepresentation.

chattychappy

dalesrider wrote: »

Yes it is.
You card provider are not blind fitters.

Well, they are blind fitters for the purposes of s75. If the contract is for fitting blinds, then by accepting the transaction (>£100) they become responsible for blind fitting!

Demanding expert evidence seems to be standard practice, but that doesn't mean it's always legitimate. No doubt a proportion of people don't bother because of the cost/hassle or indeed their claim is bogus. It's certainly what I'd do if I was a CC facing a S75 claim.

dalesrider wrote: »

Remember you have to prove breach of contract and misrepresentation.

(I think you meant "or".)

You would only have to prove it if you went to court. It is the CC's own rule (not law) if they say they want you to prove it to them.

If the photos show the problem, then that's enough in my opinion. I'd probably just sue them (warn first), using the photos + your witness statement as evidence. Expert evidence would be disproportionately expensive in a case like this. A judge would just take a look, say "yep it's pretty obvious to me" and what would the CC say in defence when they've not even been on the site? In fact it probably wouldn't even go that far.

Of course all this depends on the T+Cs (of the fitting job) and that there isn't any other relevant info missed out from the story. If the job was particularly expensive (?thousands) then producing expert evidence might be a reasonable demand. In this case the CC could ask the judge to require it to be produced.

InsideInsurance

chattychappy wrote: »

If the photos show the problem, then that's enough in my opinion.

That would of cause depend on how borderline the issue is and how well articulated the complaint was. I must admit that from the OP's initial post I am unclear what they are claiming the root cause is in terms of the positioning of the blinds. Are they in the window recess but too close to the window? From the sounds of:

blackout blinds which have been fitted so close to the window recesses

It sounds like the OP is saying they arent in the recess but the OP thinks they should be further into the room.

Another consideration will of cause be who provided the measurements for the blind as it could be they were fitted perfectly but are simply too narrow.

If a claim is poorly articulated and evidence provided doesnt show a significant problem then it can often be easier to tell someone to get a "professional" piece of evidence than go backwards and forwards asking them to speak clearer.

dalesrider

chattychappy wrote: »

Well, they are blind fitters for the purposes of s75. If the contract is for fitting blinds, then by accepting the transaction (>£100) they become responsible for blind fitting!

Demanding expert evidence seems to be standard practice, but that doesn't mean it's always legitimate. No doubt a proportion of people don't bother because of the cost/hassle or indeed their claim is bogus. It's certainly what I'd do if I was a CC facing a S75 claim.

You take a case to court a judge will want to hear expert advice to prove eoither way.
Same with a CC provider.

chattychappy wrote: »

(I think you meant "or".)

Yes.

chattychappy wrote: »

You would only have to prove it if you went to court. It is the CC's own rule (not law) if they say they want you to prove it to them.

No, that is the basis of a S75 claim. As such it it upto you to prove your case.
Remember if you win, you get the cost back.

chattychappy wrote: »

If the photos show the problem, then that's enough in my opinion. I'd probably just sue them (warn first), using the photos + your witness statement as evidence. Expert evidence would be disproportionately expensive in a case like this. A judge would just take a look, say "yep it's pretty obvious to me" and what would the CC say in defence when they've not even been on the site? In fact it probably wouldn't even go that far.

Of course all this depends on the T+Cs (of the fitting job) and that there isn't any other relevant info missed out from the story. If the job was particularly expensive (?thousands) then producing expert evidence might be a reasonable demand. In this case the CC could ask the judge to require it to be produced.

Photo's are not enough... Ever hear of photoshop.....

I do not get what the Op is getting at. As for a blackout blind to work properly it needs to be fitted right upto the window and any recess.
Any gap will let light round.

TBH for a blackout blind to work, they need to be fitted into groves at the side, so that there is no movement in them at all.

Time that S75 was changed and become the last resort to get money back after your legal consumer rights and not simply. As it is becoming the 1st port of call..
Remember EVERYONE that has a CC pays for these.

Crabman

dalesrider wrote: »

Time that S75 was changed and become the last resort to get money back after your legal consumer rights and not simply. As it is becoming the 1st port of call..
Remember EVERYONE that has a CC pays for these.

Yes, my latest credit card bill had a surcharge for someone else's Section 75 Claim.

:rotfl:

The credit card firms know the law and chose to operate in the UK, if they aren't happy then they are free to close their business and exit the market. I'm sure the £billions they make in profits every year will make them stick around though

dalesrider

Crabman wrote: »

Yes, my latest credit card bill had a surcharge for someone else's Section 75 Claim.

:rotfl:

You forgot my wages as well... :rotfl:

chattychappy

dalesrider wrote: »

You take a case to court a judge will want to hear expert advice to prove eoither way.

Seems you don't go to court very often. Use of experts depends on the size of the claim. A court wouldn't expect experts to be used for a relatively small case such as this where photos can demonstrate the issue.

dalesrider wrote: »

Photo's are not enough... Ever hear of photoshop.....

Nonsense. We are talking about proof on the balance of probabilities, not criminal proof. Judges rarely find that people have manufactured evidence/forged documents unless there is very good reason to suspect it. And that is from my professional experience (practising law, not using photoshop!) There are also other ways around this - eg get a notary public to certify that the photos are a genuine representation of the situation. The contentious issue seems to be whether "full blackout" was a condition of the contract rather than whether full blackout is achieved. So no need for an expert witness - the judge can decide that. In fact the OP's comment about the CC wanting "specific documentation from an expert or professional that supports my dispute about the level of quality of the goods" rather suggests a generic fob off. They should first attempt to resolve what was actually promised (?full blackout) - before addressing whether the workmanship/product was at issue and if using an expert is proportionate in the circumstances.

dalesrider wrote: »

Time that S75 was changed and become the last resort to get money back after your legal consumer rights and not simply. As it is becoming the 1st port of call...

I agree, it's out of control. But for the time being, the law is as it is. CCs understandably do their best to minimise the costs by fobbing people off. Some cardholders do their best to take advantage.