We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 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!

pip claim refused

Options
2»

Comments

  • dealer_wins
    dealer_wins Posts: 7,334 Forumite
    We the goods faulty, or mis-used?
  • We the goods faulty, or mis-used?
    Steady now!
  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 10,620 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    eskbanker wrote: »
    ....thereby averting a thread that starts with "I spent £24m on a Colombian striker and he's not scoring as many goals as I thought he would, do I have any rights under section 75?" :)

    Falcao is on loan :P

    United only paid £6m to get him - the option is for a final signing fee of £43.5m if United want him but as it's a deposit towards a final payment I'm sure S75 would cover him ;)

    Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness: 

    People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.

  • Nasqueron wrote: »
    Falcao is on loan :P

    United only paid £6m to get him - the option is for a final signing fee of £43.5m if United want him but as it's a deposit towards a final payment I'm sure S75 would cover him ;)
    Nope.

    It's over £30,000.
  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 10,620 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Nope.

    It's over £30,000.

    I suspect if he gets into the habit of scoring they might not need to make a claim ;)

    Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness: 

    People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.

  • Now now, let's not make tits of ourselves...
  • lisaf33
    lisaf33 Posts: 11 Forumite
    Please can you advise me ,paid for daughters implants with my cc.CC company refused to refund me as purchase was not for myself.Implants ruptured and were faulty . CC company said i am a third party and there is no contact with me . Can i still get refund?

    My dad was turned down by barley for the same thing. He is just I the process of taking this to the financial ombudsman.
  • littlerock
    littlerock Posts: 1,774 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Not directly related but is this a loophole in S75? My son has often paid for flights for me to visit him in the US. He does this online with his credit card. But of course I am the person who flies so they are booked in my name, he just pays.

    Who has the contract with the airline, him or me? If a flight was cancelled, for instance, who would claim compensation or would neither of us be able to?
  • grumbler
    grumbler Posts: 58,629 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    littlerock wrote: »
    Not directly related but is this a loophole in S75? My son has often paid for flights for me to visit him in the US. He does this online with his credit card. But of course I am the person who flies so they are booked in my name, he just pays.

    Who has the contract with the airline, him or me? If a flight was cancelled, for instance, who would claim compensation or would neither of us be able to?
    MSE wrote:
    I booked tickets for me and five friends. Are we all protected?
    There's conflicting information on this, but in general, if you've paid for a group booking, such as tickets or a holiday for friends or non-immediate family, you should be protected for the full payment. Yet for those who want to play it safe, the best bet is to ask others to pay their own way where possible.
    Let's say you pay for a whole group of mates to go on holiday with your credit card, and they pay you back their portion. Section 75 protection becomes confused if the holiday firm goes into administration, as there is some argument over who is part of the credit card contract.
    Trading Standards was positive, telling us the payee "is entitled to a compensation of the full amount from the credit card company".
    But the Financial Ombudsman says there's a chance you'll not be covered for the full amount, possibly only being entitled to your own proportion of the payment. So while payments for partners and children are easier, others are not so clear-cut.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.8K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.8K Life & Family
  • 257K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.