Section 75 question re Thomas Cook

Murmansk

My partner and I booked a flight-only with Thomas Cook Airline direct with Thomas Cook online.

We accept that we don't have ATOL protection.

I did the booking so my name is on there as the lead traveler but we paid on HER credit card - of course the documentation they sent has BOTH our names on it but my name is at the top next to the address.

My concern is that Section 75 protection may be refused because I booked the tickets but SHE paid on her credit card.

Ben8282

I can't see that this would matter but of course she will have to make the claim to her credit card company not you.

Terry_Towelling

This sort of issue has cropped up a number of times and led to a bit of debate. Buying something for someone else can be interpreted as giving a gift, thereby denying the actual debtor any rights under S75 for any purchase where they are not a primary beneficiary of said purchase.

It has been difficult to pin down anything that reflects that position in law, however.

Anyway, it seems (he said hopefully) that S75 protection should not be ruled out simply because the 'debtor' (the cardholder) is not the sole beneficiary of the purchase.

Ben8282

Terry_Towelling wrote: »

This sort of issue has cropped up a number of times and led to a bit of debate. Buying something for someone else can be interpreted as giving a gift, thereby denying the actual debtor any rights under S75 for any purchase where they are not a primary beneficiary of said purchase.

It has been difficult to pin down anything that reflects that position in law, however.

Anyway, it seems (he said hopefully) that S75 protection should not be ruled out simply because the 'debtor' (the cardholder) is not the sole beneficiary of the purchase.

I was just thinking that in respect of this particular type of purchase, airline tickets, it must be a very common practice for a booking for multiple passengers to have been paid in one transaction by one single credit card belonging to one member of the party. In fact, in respect of leisure travel, I would think it more common than each member of a party using their own card.

eco_warrior

This is a chargeback anyway, that is if all you seek is a refund?

If this were a s75 claim then it could be dependent on the banks own stance with these things.

The contract is essentially in your name but the cardholder (debtor) is a passenger and both of you are beneficiaries of the service. I’d think in normal circumstances this would be acceptable to some if not most banks.

In my own experience of travel industry insolvency and s75 claims I’ve known the rules to be made softer when it comes to this sort of thing. Meaning whole families are covered and not just the cardholder.