Section 75 4 party transaction

faraway786

I really need some help and I’m hoping someone can help me. I purchase a service directly with a company however the company used his other company credit card payment device to take the payment. I have the contract with the first company details and the receipt received was second company receipt. I didn’t take note because it was a direct payment. The person owns both companies so he claimed. However in now trying to claim back a lot of money under section 75 the credit card said there’s no link with the second company. However I didn’t know that it’s two separate companies. I researched and found that the other company he put on his sons name and I can prove that there is an associate of both company via electoral roll and the person who took the payment is the appointed representative for the other company. He is also a shareholder of that company. He has a benefit and interest in the other company and I know it was him that started the other company. So will my claim be valid and what can I quote to prove to FOS I have a valid claim? It couldn’t be any direct when going into a shop and paying directly. It was a case if trying to prove there is an association with each other. Is my claim valid? 

eskbanker

You might be able to get some ideas about lines of argument from a case mentioned in another recent thread:

https://qsc.law/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Marshall-v-Tesco-Judgment-Handed-Down.pdf

faraway786

Thank you yes I have read the judgement on this. The second point that needs to be also looked at is

If a company has an appointed representative and that appointed representative takes a contract of his separate company which is different in principle with the business activity performed is this covered with Credit card for Section 75? Which is a different type of credit that is within the Remit of FCA. This is in relation for credit used with a Credit card which is different to credit such as hire purchase or other regulated activities under FCA. Credit card used for deposit is different to FCA rules. 

I would appreciate an answer on this also. Thanks in advance. 

faraway786

In relation to the first question it’s because the creditor refused my claim of not having a direct link which I was really upset about. I now just wanted to confirm what the liabilities are with credit card for part payment. Since my second question is something much more in depth. 

I need to add that the transaction occurred in the same shop premises , by the so called owner of the shop. He is the appointed representative for the first company however in writing he is not director. He is the director of another company whom I made the transaction with. 

Sometimes I think you cannot get anymore direct than that. To go into a shop do the contract, pay directly and little did we know that the little payment receipt would make such a difference. However I am trying to avoid any obstacles that will come of this. Surely there should be some principles the shop should hold in not deceiving me as a customer. However I just wanted to know about specifically credit card in terms of appointed representative for another principle. Would that even matter in my case as it’s one time payment made which is very important as FCA covers all the other types of credit but I cannot see anything about purchasing one time. I was told that this is a separate to FCA regulations. Is this true?