Tesco section75 claim

harryjane

Hi I wonder if anyone can help. I recently bought a ring from Gemporia which has lost two diamonds in 18months, they wouldn't help so I put a claim in through my Tesco Credit card section 75. But get this, they have rejected my claim, as I am only an additional card holder on my husbands account. I cant find anything on their terms and conditions to say that the second card holder has no protection at all. Very disappointed as I use the card to pay for all our holidays, big items etc. I ve had the card for ten years and never knew this, was anyone else aware of this? Don't know what course of action to take now, any advice would be appreciated

Thanks

unforeseen

It is the norm that S75 only applies to the primary card holder

harryjane

Thanks, but surely it should be terms and conditions somewhere, ? You don't think there is any point me putting in a formal complaint>

AndyCF

harryjane wrote: »

Thanks, but surely it should be terms and conditions somewhere, ? You don't think there is any point me putting in a formal complaint>

I don't think there is anything to lose by asking about it, but as mentioned it seems highly likely it is only the primary holder who would 'qualify' (for want of a better word?) for S75. You could mention you've been with them many years etc and been happy until this point etc etc.

I do not see there is anything to lose as I say by whipping up a polite letter about it. The worst I suspect would be "sorry, no" , unless others advice against this ? If it was me I'd probably ask at least.

eskbanker

harryjane wrote: »

Thanks, but surely it should be terms and conditions somewhere, ?

It's nothing to do with Tesco's terms and conditions though, as section 75 coverage arises from cardholder's legal rights under the Consumer Credit Act.

One of the fundamental principles under that act is that for a s75 claim to be considered there must be an unbroken chain between debtor, creditor and supplier, which in this case are your husband, Tesco and Gemporia respectively. Therefore a purchase you made on a secondary card isn't covered, although it may have been a bit more debatable if it was a purchase benefitting the primary cardholder, who is legally liable for the debt.

Further details at https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases#exceptions, including a link to the Financial Ombudsman's key ruling on a similar case at http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/62/62-consumer-credit.htm#cs2

Kim_13

harryjane wrote: »

Thanks, but surely it should be terms and conditions somewhere, ? You don't think there is any point me putting in a formal complaint>

Although not with Tesco, it is in my T and C's so it wouldn't hurt to dig your husband's out to check. You've nothing to lose by making a formal complaint, especially if it isn't in his terms. You're out of time for a chargeback so you can't try that route.

Chances of success are slim however as this stems from case law, which is followed in future decisions. There's more about this in this section: https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases#exceptions

It won't help you in this case but if future purchases of £100 or more are exclusively for you (as a ring is) make sure they're purchased on your husband's card. That way, he has purchased a gift and the chain they use to determine protection isn't broken.

Alternatively, you could look at taking a card out your in own name to keep things simple. There's zero room for dispute then.

redpete

harryjane wrote: »

Thanks, but surely it should be terms and conditions somewhere, ? You don't think there is any point me putting in a formal complaint>

It's the interpretation (by judges) of the law that says lenders share responsibility, not Tesco's imposition via their Ts&Cs.