We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Chargeback Question
dstanden
Posts: 15 Forumite
in Credit cards
Hi everyone, I am hoping that someone can help me with this...
A while ago I paid for a web development company for a service. I paid with my VISA debit card issued by HSBC. The service failed to meet my expectations, which I am told is a breach of contract. I offered the company repeated chances to rectify the problems before invoking their written 100% money back satisfaction guarantee. Internet research revealed a number of other unsatisfied customers had successfully undertaken a VISA chargeback and as the company reneged on the money-back guarantee, I spoke to HSBC.
I asked HSBC to process a chargeback and was advised of the 120-day deadline. Well within this, I completed the forms and sent them to the bank. These were not processed and sat on someone's work queue until after the deadline had elapsed (proved this with a data protection print).
I complained stating that HSBC was at fault for not processing the complaint in time. They disagreed and as they refused to entertain the complaint I was advised to complain to the ombudsman, which I duly did - sending my evidence.
The ombudsman was initially in favour of my complaint but has now ruled in the banks favour. They state that, "On the balance of probability we do not think that the claim would have been successful if it had been processed in time and therefore the bank has no case to answer".
I disagree.
Whilst the ombudsman may have final say in these matters, I do not think it is their role to determine whether or not the bank is at fault by virtue of the likelihood of a third party upholding a complaint. My argument is that the case should have had the chance of being heard by VISA and now it is out of time, this cannot happen.
Can anyone else advise?
A while ago I paid for a web development company for a service. I paid with my VISA debit card issued by HSBC. The service failed to meet my expectations, which I am told is a breach of contract. I offered the company repeated chances to rectify the problems before invoking their written 100% money back satisfaction guarantee. Internet research revealed a number of other unsatisfied customers had successfully undertaken a VISA chargeback and as the company reneged on the money-back guarantee, I spoke to HSBC.
I asked HSBC to process a chargeback and was advised of the 120-day deadline. Well within this, I completed the forms and sent them to the bank. These were not processed and sat on someone's work queue until after the deadline had elapsed (proved this with a data protection print).
I complained stating that HSBC was at fault for not processing the complaint in time. They disagreed and as they refused to entertain the complaint I was advised to complain to the ombudsman, which I duly did - sending my evidence.
The ombudsman was initially in favour of my complaint but has now ruled in the banks favour. They state that, "On the balance of probability we do not think that the claim would have been successful if it had been processed in time and therefore the bank has no case to answer".
I disagree.
Whilst the ombudsman may have final say in these matters, I do not think it is their role to determine whether or not the bank is at fault by virtue of the likelihood of a third party upholding a complaint. My argument is that the case should have had the chance of being heard by VISA and now it is out of time, this cannot happen.
Can anyone else advise?
0
Comments
-
VISA don't hear cases. Banks do. However, "failed to meet ... expectations" is far too vague. It's more an opinion than a fact unless you provided the bank with an official expert's report to support it. Have you?
I am no expert, but I agree with FOS that regardless of the 120 days rule this case was (and still is) for a court to hear, not for the bank to decide.0 -
"failed to meet ... expectations" is far too vague
Agreed, but if the company failed to honour a "written 100% money back satisfaction guarantee", isn't that a less contentious breach of contract? The failure to meet original expectations could be said to be irrelevant to the complaint....0 -
Thanks, I missed this bit
. Shame on the FOS.
Time for small claims court actions then. It's a pity that it wasn't a credit card as I'd sue the bank on principle, not the company.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 246.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards