Section 75 Flybe claim

System

This discussion was created from comments split from: Section 75 refunds - article discussion.

AndyFairbairn

I am currently in the midst of a dispute with my credit card provider (Halifax/Lloyds) about a number of payments I made to flybe in November and December which were affected by flybe’s collapse in March.  I am arranging a trip for 30 golfers to Belfast and booked all of the flights using my credit card.  There were six separate transactions ranging from £155 to £1,390 and totalling £4,187.

 

I have been told by a friend that Section 75 will only cover the flight for me, and not the flights for my fellow Club members.  Does anyone know if this is correct or does (as I had assumed) S75 cover all payments I’ve made with my card irrespective of who the beneficiary of the purchase was?

[Deleted User]

Your friend on the occasion is correct, although the lender may be feeling kind.

A chargeback would be a simple and less contentious route.

Tildaplum

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases/

I booked tickets for me and five friends. Are we all protected?

There's conflicting information on this, but in general, if you've paid for a group booking, such as tickets or a holiday for friends or non-immediate family, you should be protected for the full payment. Yet for those who want to play it safe, the best bet is to ask others to pay their own way where possible.

Let's say you pay for a whole group of mates to go on holiday with your credit card, and they pay you back their portion. Section 75 protection becomes confused if the holiday firm goes into administration, as there is some argument over who is part of the credit card contract.

Trading Standards was positive, telling us the payee "is entitled to a compensation of the full amount from the credit card company."

But the Financial Ombudsman says there's a chance you'll not be covered for the full amount, possibly only being entitled to your own proportion of the payment. So while payments for partners and children are easier, others are not so clear-cut.

If this happens to you and your bank won't reimburse the full cost, take your complaint to the Ombudsman anyway as it could agree to your complaint

eskbanker

I know this subject (of tickets for a group) comes up from time to time and that the guidance in the MSE article is equivocal, but FOS have previously found against an extended group booked on multiple invoices - decision ref DRN3558264 from March 2016 was that the invoice covering the cardholder was in scope but that the other transactions were outside s75:

In certain circumstances, section 75 gives a consumer an equal right to claim against the supplier of goods or services or the provider of credit if there’s been a breach of contract or misrepresentation by the supplier. One of those circumstances is that there must be a direct relationship between the debtor, the creditor and the supplier.

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.

Tesco Bank has offered to refund to Mrs D the additional costs that have been incurred relating to Mrs D, her husband and her daughter. I find that to be fair and reasonable in the circumstances. But as I consider that there is no debtor-creditor-supplier relationship relating to the other members of the party – I find that it wouldn’t be fair or reasonable for me to require Tesco Bank to refund to Mrs D the other costs that she has claimed.