Section 75 claim help

Becky1mpb

Hi all. Hoping somebody can provide some information to help me out. A few months ago whilst on a long ish drive there was a problem with my car. I didn't want to risk driving the rest of the trip (about 130 miles) so found a local garage on the Internet and got it towed there to be fixed. I got the train home and returned the next week to collect it. Soon after whilst back in my home town the part they replaced failed and it wasn't safe to drive. There was no way I was going to get the car towed 130 miles back to the garage it had been "fixed" at before for them to sort, so I took it to a local garage. As it had failed so soon they checked for other issues but there were no other issues so they replaced the part again and it's been fine.

As I paid for the original repair on my credit card and it was over £100 I was informed I'd be eligible to make a s75 claim through my credit card. I did some research at the time and saw that you should give the merchant the opportunity to repair/replace unless unreasonable to do so. Now I saw having my car off the road for a longer period, paying for a substantial tow to get it back to the garage and transport for me to collect the car once done as unreasonable. I'm not sure anybody (who requires a car daily for work) in that situation would have gone through all of that to get it back to the original garage.

I spoke to somebody at Santander and they told me how to claim and also stated I was not required to contact the garage myself however suggested I should (I don't like confrontation, so really didn't want to contact them).

Santander have just informed me that they have rejected my claim because I should have taken the car back to the garage so they could fix it.

I'm now searching for where I read you did not have to go back to the original merchant in situations where it was unreasonable however I cannot find this source.

Does anybody have a source I could use showing you only have to do so when reasonable. ....or on the other hand can somebody prove me wrong and show there are no exceptions, you have to return to the original merchant?

Thanks for your help in advance.

Becky1mpb

In addition I have just found the following information from the Financial Ombudsman Service:

"There are a several key areas where the rules are being wrongly applied by credit card companies, or misunderstood by consumers. There are many examples, but here are a few typical ones:


Chase the supplier


It is becoming more common for claims to be rejected by credit card companies because consumers haven't pursued the supplier for a refund first. But this isn't a satisfactory reason since both the supplier and the credit card issuer share liability. If your claim is rejected on these grounds, take your complaint to the FOS."

So it doesn't sound like a legitimate reason to reject my claim.

societys_child

Did you even contact the garage to explain the problem?

Becky1mpb

No, I would never have paid hundreds of pounds to get it towed back to them. The cost of the work is less than the tow and additional travel expenses.

Becky1mpb

When I first rang Santander they said there was no requirement to make contact.

bigadaj

Objectively you should allow the garage to fix any of the works they have undertaken.

The fact you didn't give them the opportunity means that you effectively chose to do the work elsewhere and so can't really blame them for the failing. The fact that you live a long way from the garage in question isn't really their fault.

It actually looks as though you saved money by getting the work done locally, given the potential towing costs so you aren't really out of pocket.

The one valid claim you might have is for the cost of the part, as it would have to be assumed the labour was done in good faith. If you could source the part that failed and rerun it to them then they should be able to get a credit and reimburse you, however the costs of returning may be more than the part cost. What part was it?

Becky1mpb

Thanks for the input. I think the part was about £40

pvt

Becky1mpb wrote: »

In addition I have just found the following information from the Financial Ombudsman Service:

"There are a several key areas where the rules are being wrongly applied by credit card companies, or misunderstood by consumers. There are many examples, but here are a few typical ones:


Chase the supplier


It is becoming more common for claims to be rejected by credit card companies because consumers haven't pursued the supplier for a refund first. But this isn't a satisfactory reason since both the supplier and the credit card issuer share liability. If your claim is rejected on these grounds, take your complaint to the FOS."

So it doesn't sound like a legitimate reason to reject my claim.

Yes it is. You're confusing two issues. There's the issue of establishing the garage was liable, and the issue of getting a refund if they were liable. The quote above refers to the latter.

By not contacting the original garage to tell them what had happened and asking what they would do to remedy it, you've been unreasonable. For example the garage may have offered to collect your car and repair it themselves, or made an arrangement with a garage local to you to repair it on their behalf.

I think you're onto a loser trying to pursue this further.

Becky1mpb

Thanks. Collecting the car and taking it back to theirs then fixing it would be more expensive than just refunding, it just doesn't make sense. And I was initially told there was no requirement to contact them. Me ringing and asking for my money back is the same as the bank contacting and asking. A refund is far cheaper than transporting the car to and from + cost of fixing.
Never mind

pvt

Becky1mpb wrote: »

Thanks. Collecting the car and taking it back to theirs then fixing it would be more expensive than just refunding, it just doesn't make sense. And I was initially told there was no requirement to contact them. Me ringing and asking for my money back is the same as the bank contacting and asking. A refund is far cheaper than transporting the car to and from + cost of fixing.
Never mind

That may be so, but it wasn't your decision to make.

If you contacted the garage and they refused to be reasonable and put the problem right, then you might have a case.

You don't seem to understand what s75 provides. It is purely that the CC provider is jointly and severally liable along with their client. The CC provider will not pay you out because you decided it was more convenient to use a nearer garage and didn't want any confrontation.

You may have grounds for complaint if the CC provider told you you didn't need to contact the garage at all.

Whilst they're correct you didn't need to contact the garage to make the s75 claim, if you hadn't first contacted the garage about the problem with the repair, then there is no s75 claim.

Where is the faulty part? The original garage should at least be given that back so they have an opportunity to get a refund from their supplier. And what about their charge for towing you to their garage - why do you feel you're entitled to a refund for that service?

Becky1mpb

No I don't fully understand it, it's not my line of business, that's why I've asked for help. I was reluctant to ask on here after looking though some other threads on here as people seem to take pleasure belittling those asking for help.

I did not think I'd be entitled to claim the cost of towing the car back to the original garage hence why I didn't do that. I didn't even think about claiming anything until a colleague of mine told me I should because it should have lasted a lot longer.