Section 75 - QQ

HGWmummy73

I think l have read the section 75 rules as if pay just a small amount on my c/c then my entire purchase is covered.  EG pay £100 on my c/c my entire 15k purchase is covered?
I am buying a new kitchen from my savings and want to ensure my ££ is as safe as possible.  Using  reputable local company for the kitchen but l would rather be safe than sorry.
Am l right in my understanding ?
Thank you :-)

eskbanker

Yes, you're correct - it is theoretically possible to put just a penny on a credit card to achieve s75 coverage for the whole purchase, as long as each item value is between £100 and £30,000.

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

MinuteNoodles

As above. I put £100 deposit on a car and paid the remaining £16k on debit card. Dealer understood why I was doing it for the Section 75 protection so it appears I wasn't the only one who bought from them who did that.

Sandtree

Out of curiosity... a kitchen isnt "a single purchase" but a purchase made up of many parts. So on the last quote from our kitchen company (before they went bust) it was itemised like 10x highline door 60cm unit cost £50 total cost £500.

Assuming the invoice followed suit would protection only be for those items where the unit cost is above £100 each?

eskbanker

Sandtree said:

Out of curiosity... a kitchen isnt "a single purchase" but a purchase made up of many parts. So on the last quote from our kitchen company (before they went bust) it was itemised like 10x highline door 60cm unit cost £50 total cost £500.

Assuming the invoice followed suit would protection only be for those items where the unit cost is above £100 each?

Section 75 "does not apply to a claim [...] so far as the claim relates to any single item to which the supplier has attached a cash price not exceeding £100", so doors costing £50, and itemised as such on an invoice, wouldn't qualify.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/96084/DRN3704311.pdf is one example of a FOS decision endorsing this principle....

Sandtree

Thanks @eskbanker, that was my reading of the legislation (though hadn't looked for the FOS view) but wondered if others shared my view.

Shows the criticality of how multi-item purchases are illustrated on the invoice though!

born_again

Your kitchen would be corvered as it is a whole item (sum of all parts)

Think of it like going to buy a suit, Retailer prices it
Trousers £51
Jacket £50
Total £101 for the suit
As you may buy different sizes of each, they price each part separately. As it is a whole item (Suit) it is covered under S75.

Sandtree

Any evidence to support this @born_again?

As per the link from eskbanker - the Financial Ombudsman considers the purchase of a table and 4 chairs as 5 separate items of which 4 were under £100 because how they were itemised/priced on the receipt

born_again

Sandtree said:

Any evidence to support this @born_again?

As per the link from eskbanker - the Financial Ombudsman considers the purchase of a table and 4 chairs as 5 separate items of which 4 were under £100 because how they were itemised/priced on the receipt

All I can say is the Suit was a example in our training (which I will admit to getting wrong, as I thought it was 2 separate items). So to follow that on a Kitchen is the sum of all parts. Unless you buy each part separately and are invoiced (each on its own invoice) as such.
As to the table & chairs. That will swing on how the purchase was described.
Dining set = Table & Chairs
But if it was just a Dining table & customer than chose some chairs to go with it, then it be as eskbankers link.
The devil is in the detail of the sale.
If OP is unsure. Then best to contact their card provider and seek their opinion. As working in this field, I know ALL providers are not equal in their decision making.

eskbanker

born_again said:

Sandtree said:

Any evidence to support this @born_again?

As per the link from eskbanker - the Financial Ombudsman considers the purchase of a table and 4 chairs as 5 separate items of which 4 were under £100 because how they were itemised/priced on the receipt

All I can say is the Suit was a example in our training (which I will admit to getting wrong, as I thought it was 2 separate items). So to follow that on a Kitchen is the sum of all parts. Unless you buy each part separately and are invoiced (each on its own invoice) as such.

I appreciate that you're working in this area and have been trained, but don't see the parallel - a suit is an identifiable entity that can reasonably be characterised as a 'single item', although would still see some potential difficulty if the invoice had one line for 'jacket' and a separate line for 'trousers' if each was below £100.

However, a kitchen is a room - it is fairly commonplace to talk about 'buying a new kitchen' but what people actually mean by that is 'buying lots of items (fixtures, fittings and equipment) to put into a room, plus fitting services'.  I can't for the life of me understand how an itemised bill of materials on an invoice could possibly be construed as a 'single item' (as required by the legislation) - I can see that if a merchant issues a one line invoice saying 'kitchen', with no breakdown, then perhaps there is an argument that it qualifies for s75, but if the invoice includes one line (among many others) referring to 'ten doors @ £50 each' then I believe that card companies would have the right to reject that part of a s75 claim, and, let's face it, most will be looking for excuses not to pay out....

Sandtree

born_again said:

Sandtree said:

Any evidence to support this @born_again?

As per the link from eskbanker - the Financial Ombudsman considers the purchase of a table and 4 chairs as 5 separate items of which 4 were under £100 because how they were itemised/priced on the receipt

All I can say is the Suit was a example in our training (which I will admit to getting wrong, as I thought it was 2 separate items). 

Sorry to labour the point but its interesting... at what point does a jacket and trousers become a suit? I fully agree if the receipt said Mens Suit £180 then its legally one item but if its listed as two items with individual prices I am surprised they'd be considered in aggregate. So covered but how about if it says Mens Suit Jacket Navy £90 and Mens Suit Trousers Orange £90? These are two items that could "make up a suit" but the colour differences suggest they werent... how about Mens Trousers Navy £90, Mens Jacket Navy £90.... no mention of a suit but the matched colour could suggest it is? What if they were split over two transactions because my size of trousers were out on the day but I took the jacket then and there?