Nationwide refusing my Section 75 claim

johnsmith244

Hi,

I ordered an item online and when I received it, it had been tampered with. The tampering of the package was not obvious at first sight, hence I signed for the delivery and took it. After opening and seeing no items inside I carefully inspected the package and noticed it had been tampered with. I immediately contacted the merchant and notified them. After some time they refused to deal with the situation so I contacted my bank who removed the amount of my credit card and started their investigation.

Nationwide has now sent their final response by saying:

"... on this occasion, we don't have enough evidence to show you hadn't received the goods. The documentation provided by the merchant shows the weight of the parcel sent to you.

Not only this, it was outlined to you, not to accept the parcel if there was any damage to it. Whilst I fully appreciate there wasn't any immediate damage that was noticeable, as you signed for the parcel you have accepted the parcel in the condition it was in when delivered. Therefore, we have no basis to raise a claim against the merchant."

I paid by a credit card because I thought I was covered for things like this but clearly the bank seems to think otherwise. Will the financial ombudsman say the same thing or will they actually help me? Or should I try to take legal action against the bank?


Thanks,
John

hollydays

What were the goods

unholyangel

Sounds like your bank haven't done a section 75 claim and instead have attempted a chargeback.

I'm not sure whether they do that because they don't understand the difference or because they do and want the merchant to be liable rather than them.

Ensure it was a section 75 claim and remind them that the goods remain at the traders risk until they enter your physical possession. And also that the package being damaged and goods falling out carries the test of balance of probability while the merchant delivering the goods and you then going on to make a fraudulent claim carries a test of beyond all reasonable doubt.

Because that is what they are alleging if they believe the goods were delivered. Of course if you've accused the courier of stealing them, then you kind of lose the high horse you need to point that out.

johnsmith244

At the moment the response I got above from Nationwide is to a complaint I made due to them refusing my chargeback claim and also my section 75 claim.

They have also referred to the above response as the final response from Nationwide. I guess the next step would be for me to take this to the financial ombudsman?

born_again

Well I can understand not doing the chargeback as it would fail.

Non receipt rest on being signed for, not what is in the package.. You could get nothing or a brick. If you sign for it than its a straight fail.

On S75 it would be a hard one. They have looked at the evidence the merchant has provided and the fact you accepted the package.
If you are not happy than it is the financial ombudsman you need to go to.

No point in taking legal action against the bank. It should be the delivery co or retailer.

bris

S75 isn't a money back guarantee. There are defences that work with S75 claims such as this one.


Two sides to the story with the CC being more on the merchants side than yours as they have the same rights as the merchant so their call is to state no breach of contract.


It will be difficult even with a ombudsman claim as they state the weight of the parcel so anything missing like a laptop or whatever it is would be noticeable in the weight.

eddddy

born_again wrote: »

No point in taking legal action against the bank. It should be the delivery co or retailer.

No... in this case, legal action would be against the retailer and/or the bank - and not the delivery company.

The OP is alleging 'breach of contract'. Section 75 makes the credit card company jointly liable for breach of contract with the retailer.

The OP has no contract with the delivery company, so there is no scope for a claim against them.

(...assuming that the transaction meets all the requirements for section 75 - e.g. the item's price is £100 or over, etc.)

johnsmith244

Few things to mention:
- transaction amount was within the requirements for the section 75 claim
- packaging being damaged was not obvious at first sight
- package containing the item or not is not possible to know without opening packaging and checking
- bank has mentioned that I should of not signed for the package as it was mentioned in an email from merchant (if damaged do not accept package), but I get many packages in a day, how would I know what merchant the package is from?

Does anyone think this is sufficient grounds for a financial Ombudsman complaint against the bank?

BoGoF

You get 'many packages in a day'?

Are you a business? Are these B2B transactions?

neilmcl

johnsmith244 wrote: »

Few things to mention:
- transaction amount was within the requirements for the section 75 claim
- packaging being damaged was not obvious at first sight
- package containing the item or not is not possible to know without opening packaging and checking
- bank has mentioned that I should of not signed for the package as it was mentioned in an email from merchant (if damaged do not accept package), but I get many packages in a day, how would I know what merchant the package is from?

Does anyone think this is sufficient grounds for a financial Ombudsman complaint against the bank?

The weight, or lack off might've been a giveaway.

garth549

I don't understand some of the responses above. The bank is on very thin ice stating that you signed for the goods therefore case closed. Even if the weight seems to match.

Expecting you to inspect the package and its contents whilst the courier waits around is wholly unreasonable. In fact most couriers wouldn't let you do this as they have very tight schedules.

One of my friends bought some expensive camera equipment online once. When it was delivered the box just had a packaged brick in it! It took a few letters but he eventually succeeded in a S75 claim.

I'd write an LBA to the bank stating that they are jointly liable with the retailer under S75. If you were determined to go all the way to a court hearing then it's likely the bank would fold and settle the claim before it got that far.