We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Section 75 dispute advice needed

13»

Comments

  • eskbanker
    eskbanker Posts: 39,922 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    This does raise an interesting issue about the permanence of refunds - my understanding is that chargeback refunds are essentially temporary, pending resolution of discussions with the merchant over 45 days, whereas a s75 refund should be regarded as permanent, in that if the card company accepts liability to the cardholder then the matter is closed, regardless of subsequent debate between card company and merchant.

    So, if a cardholder submits a s75 claim and ultimately receives a refund without any indication that the card company has chosen to pursue a chargeback, then I think the cardholder is entirely justified in seeing the refund as permanent.

    OP - did FOS assess the issue on the basis of it being a chargeback claim or a s75 one? If it was regarded as the former then presumably the option of starting again with another s75 claim is still on the table, but if it was the latter then the card company shouldn't have had the right to rescind the refund....
  • eco_warrior
    eco_warrior Posts: 563 Forumite
    eskbanker wrote: »
    This does raise an interesting issue about the permanence of refunds - my understanding is that chargeback refunds are essentially temporary, pending resolution of discussions with the merchant over 45 days, whereas a s75 refund should be regarded as permanent, in that if the card company accepts liability to the cardholder then the matter is closed, regardless of subsequent debate between card company and merchant.

    So, if a cardholder submits a s75 claim and ultimately receives a refund without any indication that the card company has chosen to pursue a chargeback, then I think the cardholder is entirely justified in seeing the refund as permanent.

    OP - did FOS assess the issue on the basis of it being a chargeback claim or a s75 one? If it was regarded as the former then presumably the option of starting again with another s75 claim is still on the table, but if it was the latter then the card company shouldn't have had the right to rescind the refund....

    45 days in the bare minimum (30 for Visa). Claims that go the full distance can be 6 months or more.

    I agree re S75, you’d only expect a refund once a claim was upheld.

    The op has had a chargeback but isn’t giving the full story (it hasn’t been given it by his bank).
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
  • 353.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 246.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.1K Life & Family
  • 260.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K 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.