Section 75 - QQ

born_again

As  I said. If sold as a Suit, but priced as individual items, then it's a suit 1 item as far as S75 goes
The devil is in the detail.

I get what eskbanker is saying. Yes a Kitchen is a room, but it is also a part within that room of fixed furniture usually.
 You buy a Kitchen as a whole unit, to fit your room. Yes they may/will invoice separate items in some cases (good for chargebacks) as this is how they order it and also to give the purchaser a breakdown of item cost, with maybe instillation separate. All I can go by is how we would look at it and pass it onto the team that ultimately make the decision.

Another example would be a 3 piece suite. They may price each item separately (as you may choose different items to make it to suit your needs), but it is sold as a single item.


Again as I said. Best for OP to take it up with their card provider to see how they would view it.
Far to many different opinions from different card providers on what falls within or not. Again agree with eskbanker if invoiced as separate items it does appear to give them a cop out. 

Sandtree

born_again said:

As  I said. If sold as a Suit, but priced as individual items, then it's a suit 1 item as far as S75 goes
The devil is in the detail.

But as I say... what is a suit? What definition are you using to say when a trousers and jacket become a single item if listed separately? What if I buy one jacket and two pairs of trousers as I often do? If I buy it over two transactions (as I have also done because of stock issues) is it still one item?

My understanding was more in line with eskbanker's in that it simply depends on the number of rows individually priced and not some separate judgement on if they combine to make a new whole.

eskbanker

I think the issue here is that the only fact is what's stated in the legislation about 'single items' needing to be priced above £100 to qualify and anything else is just interpretation, unless anyone is aware of case law providing precedents in this area that would offer clear and authoritative guidance - relevant FOS decisions may assist but are ultimately based on assessment of what's fair rather than simply what is legal.

As born_again concedes, each card company will have its own internal opinion about this that governs how they'll deal with claims - given the inherent vested interest then I'd have expected most to aim to minimise their liabilities where possible but born_again's employer seems to take an unusually generous customer-centric view!

I'm no expert but it still seems to me that a reasonable rule of thumb would be to regard the invoice wording as specifying what is a single item, i.e. everything itemised is, by definition, a single item....

Sandtree

Fully agree that this is a pure academic discussion @eskbanker and for various reasons companies may intentionally or inadvertently train their staff in a more stringent or generous interpretations. 

In a different matter not that long ago a client received external legal advice that the likely outcome would depend on if the UK Supreme Court or the European Court made the ultimate ruling on the matter (ie timing -v- Brexit) with a view that the EU court would be significantly more likely to side with the consumer irrespective of certain other contracts etc (their GC said that they'd finally found a single benefit to Brexit). Hence even if academic these types of matters are interesting and even more so if you see the legal advice -v- what the contact centre are told.