Section 75 Credit Card Reversal - slightly odd one

bris

The OP clearly states the OP made a S75 claim so the references to a charge back are irrelevant.

The fact they even allowed the OP to claim for other people who  paid the OP for using their CC is also unusual is would usually be excluded as only the card holder is covered. A card holder paying for the entire party and not getting paid back, such as a family holiday would be covered as the holder benefits from the family holiday but this is not that.

The JamesPeter case is also relevant as even though it doesn't set a legal precedent they do usually look over past cases for guidance so even though each case is unique they would take the past cases into consideration and this is pretty much the same case.

eskbanker

bris said:

The OP clearly states the OP made a S75 claim so the references to a charge back are irrelevant.

No - OP thought they were making a s75 claim, and may even have specified this when contacting the bank, but it's evident from the rest of the post (e.g. the provisional reversible refund and the 45 day window) that the bank chose to process it as a chargeback claim....