Section 75 dispute long resolved, rears its ugly head...HELP!

gdedman

Hi all MSEers,

Im sure this has happened to someone before and wondered if you could offer some advice.

Ill try and keep my explanation as succinct as possible!

I filed a Section 75 dispute with a car hire company regarding damage to a rental car.
Capital one agreed to fight and eventually won and refunded me.
Two months later I noticed two debits from my credit card from the rental company which is based in Bulgaria, while I was working in France.
I called Cap One immediately and they confirmed this looked like fraud, using my old card details, without permission.
Cap One refunded me once more.
Now, some three months later, Cap One email to say the merchant is disputing the refund and that the case is re-open.

I have provided evidence I was working in France, attaching my contract, but other than that I cannot prove, I did not use them as of course, I have no contract, no receipt, nothing.

Can anyone shed a light on why this is re-opened when it was fraud on the merchants part?
Cap One are not responding to my emails and have given me a deadline to reply of seven days which is up tomorrow.

Any advise would be so very much appreciated.

Regards

chattychappy

I think this has nothing to do with S75. Essentially there are 4 different ways you can get a "refund" on a CC:

1) Merchant initiates a refund.
2) CC uses "chargeback". The money is returned to you via the network and the merchant is out of pocket.
3) S75. You claim breach of contract/misrepresentation. The CC is jointly liable for this. If you have a case, the CC must refund you whether or not it has any remedy against the merchant.
4) You dispute the transaction as unrecognised. The onus is on the CC to prove that you authorised the transaction.

It seems you used them once before, but not this time? Is that it?

Then I think you must continue to dispute it as an "unauthorised transaction". Your proof you weren't there is helpful, but in fact it's for the CC to prove you authorised the transaction, not for you to prove you didn't. I would follow the CapOne complaints process and then to the FOS if necessary.

Don't mention S75, it has nothing to do with S75. Also, don't have anything to do with the hire company. This is entirely between you and CapOne.

gdedman

Thanks ChattyChap,

I hear what you are saying about not mentioning the Section 75, but it is linked in that after my S75 claim was successful, the merchant has obviously taken offense to this and gone ahead and tried to recoup their loss by fraudulently taking the amount back.

I am indeed having nothing to do with the merchant, and it is good to know that it is on the onus of CapOne to prove I authorised the transactions, they made it sound like I had something to answer.

I have bombarded CapOne's email address to get them to respond to me so we shall wait and see.
If CapOne reverse the two, quoted by them as 'fraudulent transactions', then I will indeed have a fight on my hands and take them to the FOS.

bris

They got your details from an initial car hire I assume, this gives them authority to use your card as you had an agreement with them to take money for any damage caused.


This is part of the initial agreement whether you like it or not. now you then dispute the damage so the CC co refund the money.


Now it gets tricky when the hire co dispute the transaction, it can and probably will be reversed as the CC co have no way of knowing who is telling the truth. The CC co is liable for a clear breach of contract but they have no way of telling if you did or didn't cause the damage so simply don't get involved.

gdedman

I think I need to be more clear...

I had evidence the hire company lied about the cost of damage to a flat tyre after talking with them on their chat system at the time. They then proceeded to charge me £250 instead of the quoted £25 when I dropped the car off.
Hence why I filed a section 75.
CC company agreed this was a breach by them, and was settled back in November.

THEN the car hire company went ahead and took two payments within two days back in December £65 and £250, so not even matching the original charges without my knowledge causing me to block my card after CC company refunded me.

So, thats the full story.

If youre saying the charges will be reversed and I will now be liable can you advise if I can refuse point blank to repay this?
There is no way I am going to pay for a lie from a car hire company.

bris

If the CC co saw the evidence of the breach then the reversal will stand, if they just refunded you on your say so, which they often do then when the merchant disputes it, it gets reversed.


If it was as easy as just saying I didn't do it then car hire companies, hotels etc would never get paid as everybody would just charge back.


The CC is not the courts, they can't tell who is telling the truth so they don't get involved unless they see proof of the breach. If you have provided that then you have nothing to worry about.

Shakin_Steve

When you say 'on their chat system' was this a typed conversation that produced a hard copy?
Is your card still blocked so that they can't take any further payments?
If so, tell Cap One that you've no intention of paying and you'll see them in court.

gdedman

I gave the Credit Card company screenshots from a whatsapp conversation discussing the incident when it happened during the rental and they were happy with that it clearly states, on several occasions the damage I had made, which I was not disputing, would cost me £25. Then on drop-off, the guy went for broke on me charging me £250 for a puncture.

Nowhere in their terms and conditions, or their chat conversation with me does it say anything about a £250 charge for a puncture.

Anyway, I thank you for your help guys, its just that it gives one a sick feeling when you win a dispute, move on financially and then back it comes!