Transaction in Dispute & Interest

Emily_Joy

I have been told (by Virgin Money) that the transaction for which I've submitted a S75 claim will be marked as "in dispute" and that I don't need to make any payments towards it. Till 2nd of January there is a %0 interest on purchases and I was hoping the dispute will be resolved by then, but it wasn't. The current account balance corresponds to the sum in dispute.
Do I still have make minimal payments?
Is it better to pay the card off completely to avoid any further complications?
I am not planning to use this card for a while now.

chattychappy

You made a S75 claim, but Virgin are treating the transaction differently, presumably attempting a chargeback. If it was genuinely "disputed" then you shouldn't have to pay it until the dispute is resolved. They should reverse the transaction in the meantime. With a S75 claim, you are not disputing the transaction. The transaction is perfectly valid - you must pay the money. But you are claiming that there was a breach of contract/misrep, so you are owed something back, which could be less, the same, or more than the original transaction value.

Whatever the ins and outs, I would always pay minimums. If you don't, then you can come a cropper with late payment markers, fees, blocked cards. Depending on the outcome you might be able to argue that these should be reversed. In practice in can be a huge hassle.

By paying, you are not admitting anything.

eco_warrior

In would suggest only Virgin can answer this question with any real accuracy.

Ben8282

Make any minimum payment due. You can always spend the payment if making the minimum payment leaves you hard up.
Also it is not 2nd January yet so not sure why you are saying that it wasn't resolved by then unless you mean 2nd Jan 2018?
What sort of amount are we talking about here?

Emily_Joy

Ben8282 wrote: »

Also it is not 2nd January yet so not sure why you are saying that it wasn't resolved by then unless you mean 2nd Jan 2018?

What sort of amount are we talking about here?

I meant 2nd of January 2019. I am just being realistic taking into account the time of the year. The amount is a little over £1000.

On a slightly different topic it appears that one can't set up a DD for a Post Office saving account opened a couple of days ago. So I suspect some financial platforms which handle payments are having maintenance aka holidays.

eco_warrior wrote: »

In would suggest only Virgin can answer this question with any real accuracy.

Alas, Virgin Money Disputes Department is open from 9am to 5pm on weekdays only.

fwor

<please ignore - spam removal>

FestiveJoy

Emily_Joy wrote: »

I have been told (by Virgin Money) that the transaction for which I've submitted a S75 claim will be marked as "in dispute" and that I don't need to make any payments towards it. Till 2nd of January there is a %0 interest on purchases and I was hoping the dispute will be resolved by then, but it wasn't. The current account balance corresponds to the sum in dispute.
Do I still have make minimal payments?
Is it better to pay the card off completely to avoid any further complications?
I am not planning to use this card for a while now.

That's quite a neat situation, and assuming you are keen to pursue your claim, I would not pay anything and here's why.

You had created a claim under S75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which, in simple terms, allows you to pursue the credit provider in respect of a failure of a supplier, for that failure (e.g. goods not supplied, goods not fit for purpose, etc)

It's not clear the exact basis of why you have raised this claim, but that is perhaps unimportant in this instance. Nor is it clear why you have not pursued the supplier directly. Usual reasons are that the supplier cannot now be contacted (e.g. gone bust, done a runner, etc to use the vernacular).
Indeed, you are not obliged to make a claim against the supplier directly, but if the supplier is still in existence, the creditor could make the supplier party to the proceedings (despite you not having done so)

Now if we take a step back, and look at this as a simple customer-supplier relationship, and you had ordered the item from the supplier and were unsatisified on a basis supported by law, you probably would not pay the invoice when it arrived, would you?
Indeed, there is plenty of evidence to suggest if you did go onto pay for the goods, the court may consider this to be the acceptance of the goods, which may adversely affect your claim.

So it's really no difference in this case, except it is the creditor who is claiming the money rather than the supplier.

Don't pay, be prepared to go to court if necessary to uphold your rights, and if the court agrees with you, then you won't have to pay a penny.
You would alsousually get your court fees back too.

But if you lose, then expect quite a lot of expenses to be added, especially if both the creditor & the supplier have to come to court to defend your claim against them.

I guess the question therefore comes down to whether or not you are prepared to go to court if necessary, to have this matter heard by a judge?
If not, I suggest you pay up now and move on.

:xmastree::xmastree::xmastree::xmassign:

Emily_Joy

FestiveJoy wrote: »

You had created a claim under S75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which, in simple terms, allows you to pursue the credit provider in respect of a failure of a supplier, for that failure (e.g. goods not supplied, goods not fit for purpose, etc)

The supplier in question is in continental Europe. I haven't ordered anything, I've paid in person. The item in question was a replacement part for a vehicle restoration. The supplier insisted more than once - including several emails that this is the correct replacement part whilst it turned out it is was not. It was impossible for me to check that this replacement part would fit whilst in the shop.

chattychappy

FestiveJoy wrote: »

You had created a claim under S75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which, in simple terms, allows you to pursue the credit provider in respect of a failure of a supplier, for that failure (e.g. goods not supplied, goods not fit for purpose, etc)

It's not clear the exact basis of why you have raised this claim, but that is perhaps unimportant in this instance.

(emphasis added)

It is very important. Only in the claim of misrepresentation where you reject the goods or breach of condition (rather than breach of term) is the contract voidable. Else you remain liable to pay, even though you might have a S75 claim.

FestiveJoy wrote: »

Now if we take a step back, and look at this as a simple customer-supplier relationship, and you had ordered the item from the supplier and were unsatisified on a basis supported by law, you probably would not pay the invoice when it arrived, would you?

It depends why you were unsatisfied. You might be entitled to, and then choose to reject the goods in which case you wouldn't pay. Or you might keep them but have a complaint. Then you must pay, but could still have a claim. But this is not such a simple case is it? The OP has purchased via a credit card where there are additional consequences of not paying - blocked card, negative CRA report etc.

FestiveJoy wrote: »

Indeed, there is plenty of evidence to suggest if you did go onto pay for the goods, the court may consider this to be the acceptance of the goods, which may adversely affect your claim.

If you want to reject the goods, then that's what you do. Quickly. Paying having made such an election+complaint isn't going to prejudice anything in the context of purchase via CC. Personally I'd include in my letter to the CC that to keep things simple, I will pay the bill in the meantime but this is not to be taken as an admission.

FestiveJoy wrote: »

Don't pay, be prepared to go to court if necessary to uphold your rights, and if the court agrees with you, then you won't have to pay a penny.
You would alsousually get your court fees back too.

Bad advice IMHO. If you win, you might still have the hassle of blocked card, negative payment markers to contend with. As for getting court fees back - well depends how much you "win". The court may uphold only part of the claim. But yes, if you win the full amount of your claim, then you should get fees.

FestiveJoy wrote: »

But if you lose, then expect quite a lot of expenses to be added, especially if both the creditor & the supplier have to come to court to defend your claim against them.

Assuming it's small claim (less than £10,000) then you shouldn't get any significant expenses added on. If the CC bills not been paid, then there might be interest, late payment fees etc.

FestiveJoy wrote: »

I guess the question therefore comes down to whether or not you are prepared to go to court if necessary, to have this matter heard by a judge?
If not, I suggest you pay up now and move on.

The OP can be prepared to go court, but pay now to minimise the consequences of losing. This also leaves open the option in the meantime to negotiate with the CC and/or use the FOS.

chattychappy

Emily_Joy wrote: »

The supplier in question is in continental Europe. I haven't ordered anything, I've paid in person. The item in question was a replacement part for a vehicle restoration. The supplier insisted more than once - including several emails that this is the correct replacement part whilst it turned out it is was not. It was impossible for me to check that this replacement part would fit whilst in the shop.

It is useful that you have the emails. Did the item cost more than the equivalent of £100?

Emily_Joy

chattychappy wrote: »

It is useful that you have the emails. Did the item cost more than the equivalent of £100?

Yes it did. Otherwise, I would have given up already.