Laura Ashely Mastercard Section 75?

Bella79

born_again wrote: »

>> She paid the balance off in full from her bank account. <<

On a debit card?
If so then she needs to contact her bank and request a chargeback on that payment.
Other method. Then that would have to be part of a S75.

Just what was put on her credit card?

We bought the flights from Thomas cook using the LA Mastercard. When the statement came, she paid the balance off the credit card in full from her bank account.

[Deleted User]

How the credit card balance was paid is irrelevant.

Carrot007

Surely a S75 claim would only refund the cost of the flight for the card holder. Ticket's purchased for other people would not be covered.

eco_warrior

born_again wrote: »

You really need to look at a chargeback, but as they said you have to wait till after date of travel. I think that is what they are doing.

Give it a couple of weeks and see if the bank & Visa have made their mind up and allow future dated travel to be actioned now.
This happened with all the other travel co's that have gone under. Just takes then a while to get a decision.

Isn’t your bank processing chargebacks?

eco_warrior

Bella79 wrote: »

Hi all

Long Story short, we booked Thomas cook flights not ATOL protected. We contacted laura Ashley as soon as they went into administration.

After waiting over a week for Section 75 forms they have finally arrived, however it states on the form that they can not help or will not consider the claim unless the date of expected delivery has passed? The flight were for next May 2020. We cant wait until then for the cash back as we need to re-book? Can anyone offer any advice?

or do we need a chargeback?

Also will it matter that my friend paid on her Credit card (she's a named passenger she was travelling with us) but the invoice/remittance came in my name because I did the booking and she paid? She paid the balance off in full from her bank account.

Sorry for all the questions is so stressful were talking £1000s of pounds that we have saved over a very long time

A chargeback will sort this out. S75 can be awkward when it come to additional passengers and who paid for things, chargeback doesn’t.

18cc

For anyone reading this Forum in the future, in general I would recommend that if people go on holiday together then as far as possible each person pays for their own holiday on their own card just in case ...

18cc

I am not sure of the exact technical mechanism of chargeback but I have always thought that chargeback was exactly that - your bank charges the Merchant's bank account with a debit of the money.

In the case of Thomas Cook presumably there is no longer an open account and therefore how could chargeback work?

Section 75, however, is more like an insurance, in that the CC company will reimburse you even if they can't get the money back from the merchant.

if I am misunderstanding then perhaps someone could correct me.

eco_warrior

18cc wrote: »

I am not sure of the exact technical mechanism of chargeback but I have always thought that chargeback was exactly that - your bank charges the Merchant's bank account with a debit of the money.

In the case of Thomas Cook presumably there is no longer an open account and therefore how could chargeback work?

Section 75, however, is more like an insurance, in that the CC company will reimburse you even if they can't get the money back from the merchant.

if I am misunderstanding then perhaps someone could correct me.

A chargeback is a reversal of the original transaction. If the merchant has ceased trading it doesn’t matter, it’s the merchant bank that is debited.

18cc

Ah OK so the bank takes the hit - thanks.

eskbanker

Carrot007 wrote: »

Surely a S75 claim would only refund the cost of the flight for the card holder. Ticket's purchased for other people would not be covered.

Group bookings and section 75 are often contentious but I'm aware of at least one case where FOS determined that a claim covering all parties on an invoice qualifies, namely https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/92915/DRN3558264.pdf, where Mrs D made several bookings on separate invoices, only one of which she was included on. The FOS decision was that those on the invoice that the cardholder was named on are within s75 scope, but those on the other invoices weren't:

In this case: Mrs D is the debtor because she has used her credit card to buy the flights; Tesco Bank is the creditor because it has provided credit to Mrs D; and the supplier is the travel company that has agreed to provide flights to Mrs D and the other members of the party. But Tesco Bank does not have a direct relationship with all of the people for whom Mrs D has paid for flights. I find that there is a direct relationship relating to the tickets for her husband and daughter because they were bought on the same invoice as Mrs D’s ticket. But I find that there is no direct relationship relating to the tickets for the other members of the party that were paid for by Mrs D.