Steps to take if you have been ripped-off by a copy-cat government website

hpuse

To all those posters who HATE me to death for publishing blatant truth and informative evidence of "smearing" on this thread please click "THANKS" now :beer:

gb12345

hpuse wrote: »

Read below with your "eyes" open

We have also discussed the matter with trading standards officials. A key part of their advice is that individuals affected by using these websites should complain to the relevant regulator.

So the banks/credit card operators are regulators now are they?

You are making yourself look more stupid with every post that you make.

gb12345

hpuse wrote: »

publishing blatant truth and informative evidence

I must have missed that post amongst all the utter crap that you have posted - perhaps you could link to it.

hpuse

gb12345 wrote: »

So the banks/credit card operators are regulators now are they?

You are making yourself look more stupid with every post that you make.

At least THANK me because of my stupidity, you now know that HMPO's job is not giving consumer advise :rotfl:

wealdroam

hpuse wrote: »

http://www.theukcardsassociation.org.uk/individual/disputed-transactions.asp

That article you linked to is interesting. Did you read it?

The UK Cards Association says:

If for any reason you find a problem with the goods or services that you’ve bought with your credit card you should first contact the retailer or service provider, in order to get the issue resolved as quick as possible.

They go on to list five action points.
I am sure neither of us will have any problem with the first three points, but point number four is worth a further look.

The fourth point is:

If the retailer or service provider will not assist you or refuses to accept your complaint, then you should write a letter of complaint to either its head office or manager.

So the UK Cards Association are also saying pursue your complaint with the company first.

The fifth point they make is very close to that which you quoted, although you missed out a few words.
They say:

If all else fails, you can try and get a refund from your credit card company. Copies of any correspondence with the retailer involved in your complaint will help. Under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 your credit card company and the retailer could be equally liable in the event of any breach of contract or misrepresentation.

Note the first four words.

I would also like to dispute (that word again, sorry) your last statement:

hpuse wrote: »

The above is valid for all cards, as long as the issuing member organisation subscribes to the UK card associations code of conduct.

Clearly that "all cards" bit is wrong.
Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not apply to debit cards.

Lastly, you seem to have overlooked the significant fact that Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 only applies to purchases over £100.
As that £100 minimum is 'per item purchased', this effectively means that Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 will be of no help at all to anyone seeking a refund from these rogue companies.

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Let us get somethings straight.

The fees are normally under £100, therefore a S75 claim cannot be made. Other providers also offer a checking service, at a cost. Post Offices do so. You can also book an appointment at the Passport office, for a fee, if you are in a hurry to get a passport.

The sites work within the current law, by offering a service. They are exempt from DSRs because that servcie is deemed to start immmediately, and is personalised

The official government sites are aware of these servcie providers, and have objected when they have fallen foul of the legislation

Raising a dispute about the card transaction is not going to get anyone their money back, just the same as gambling sites do not give your money back, if your horse gets stuck in the stables.

In life you have a choice.

One ponders if OP has done their Tax Return yet and we wait to see if he pays for that as well.

hpuse

wealdroam wrote: »

That article you linked to is interesting. Did you read it?

The UK Cards Association says:

They go on to list five action points.
I am sure neither of us will have any problem with the first three points, but point number four is worth a further look.

The fourth point is:

So the UK Cards Association are also saying pursue your complaint with the company first.

The fifth point they make is very close to that which you quoted, although you missed out a few words.
They say:

Note the first four words.

I would also like to dispute (that word again, sorry) your last statement:

Clearly that "all cards" bit is wrong.
Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not apply to debit cards.

Lastly, you seem to have overlooked the significant fact that Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 only applies to purchases over £100.
As that £100 minimum is 'per item purchased', this effectively means that Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 will be of no help at all to anyone seeking a refund from these rogue companies.

@wealdroam

I don't have to read it - those blemish posters who think I am posting rubbish should read. Big question now remains WHAT is misleading in post#1.

Some card companies automate the entire dispute records to escalation process so people do not have to "write" a letter to the head. The head of disputes will get an automated report requesting review of escalations.

In fact that is a good point you raise, as I know some credit card companies still operate complaints procedure only on papers.
I will amend my post #1 with escalation that way it adds clarity !.

wealdroam

hpuse wrote: »

I don't have to read it -

Ah... sorry my mistake.

I somehow overlooked the fact that you don't read things... and encourage others not to do so.

Silly me. Sorry for the confusion.


By the way, what's a "blemish poster"?

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

wealdroam wrote: »

By the way, what's a "blemish poster"?

A baffoon?

No I am sorry, got mixed up between Flemish and Waloon.

hpuse

wealdroam wrote: »

Lastly, you seem to have overlooked the significant fact that Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 only applies to purchases over £100.
As that £100 minimum is 'per item purchased', this effectively means that Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 will be of no help at all to anyone seeking a refund from these rogue companies.

I don't mind explaining this to you since you are not here with "17 years" of dispute experience :cool:

Section 75 is an 'old' section it is not really useful for modern day and age to handle disputes especially online card fraud. Everyone acknowledges it, including card companies and credit networks. However, act is an act and it will be held till something comes new.

Since S75 is strictly between the consumer and issuer, that is the reason why credit networks (visa, mastercard, amex etc) strictly does not enforce even if the charge back less of £100 flows through their network between issuing banks. They provision it separately as a disputed transaction

Originally, i.e days before online and internet transactions, section 75 was typically used when a retailer goes bust. For e.g you placed an order for a car that cost 20K, paid advance of 5K and the retailer goes bankrupt. Here the car manufacture simply won't fulfil the order. In such cases, credit card company will have to compensate on your loss.