Credit card company refunded under s75, now the retailer is wanting me to pay them back

kaMelo

MarvinDay said:

RandomUserID said:

Stop it.

The OP had no idea what either of those terms were. They were not misled and they had no choice anyway, the bank was within its rights to raise a chargeback first as a way of dealing with an S75 claim.

You can't insist on the bank footing the bill if a chargeback fulfils your consumer rights.

Totally and utterly wrong.
Section 75 of the Consumer Credit act gives consumers statutory rights (rights that are written into and enshrined in law) and as such, the bank has no legal right to decline a S75 claim in favour of a chargeback.
I would go further and state that provided the claim was eligible for S75 then by doing what they have done, the bank were committing a criminal offence by refusing to instigate that claim and processing it as a chargeback instead.

What crime have they committed?

Money_Grabber13579

Money_Grabber13579 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

viksviks84 said:

RandomUserID said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

viksviks84 said:

Quick update, the credit company basically said the retailer has a weak legal case, as they had 45 days to counter, which they didn't and to contact Citizens Advice for more information. 
The retailer messaged me Thursday and again Friday, which ended up with them telling me they were raising a money claim against me for goods received not paid for.
I wanted to stick to my guns, but I caved and paid, you can't put a price on peace of mind.
Thanks for all your support and help, it was greatly appreciate.
At least I now know the difference between a S75 and Chargeback, and sometimes you get better aftercare with the bigger stores. 

You have my sympathy as I can fully understand why you would prefer to have peace of mind and a quiet life rather than the stress and hassle of dealing with threats to sue you - whether those threats are empty or not.

I'm sure you've done the same as many people would have done in your situation.  You made what you thought was a s75 claim (it's in the thread title) but your bank didn't make it clear to you that they were actually processing a chargeback which - unlike a s75 claim - leaves you open to being sued by the retailer afterwards to get their money back from you.  Your bank has processed your claim in such a way that they are putting their interests before yours by not treating it as statutory consumer right - which is what you thought you were asking for.  

This is why I think banks etc should be much more open with their customers about the differences between chargebacks and s75 claims.  A difference you now understand, but it's cost you to get that knowledge.  Your bank should be explaining it for free.

Best advice is to put this behind you, but don't forget the lesson if you find yourself in a similar situation.

Stop it.

The OP had no idea what either of those terms were. They were not misled and they had no choice anyway, the bank was within its rights to raise a chargeback first as a way of dealing with an S75 claim.

You can't insist on the bank footing the bill if a chargeback fulfils your consumer rights.

I knew what a S75 was, I didn't know (at the time) chargeback was possible for a credit card. 

Don't worry.  It's been quite obvious from the start of this thread that you knew what a s75 claim was but that you didn't realise that your bank had started a chargeback instead - without informing you that that was what they were doing - which I think they should have done.

However, as you now realise, some posters - like RandomUserID - are just apologists for the banking industry believing that it was none of your business to be told the difference, and that you should be quite content just to get your money back and then have to deal with threatening letters from the retailer to sue you.  (Do you remember the poster named ItsComingRome who clearly stated that the chargeback had given you everything that you wanted and I challenged them to ask you if you wanted to be threatened with being sued?  Where are they now?  Check their profile.)

You might also want to check this thread regarding how helpful RandomUserID's contributions are (HSBC Aspects — MoneySavingExpert Forum )  

Always amazes me how little some people must have to do in their lives if all they can do is antagonise people on an Internet forum and when they get banned for it, create a new user account and repeat. We’ve seen ThisnotThat, ItsComingRome and now RandomUserID…based on the pattern, the next user account will already have been created.

Oh look, RandomUserID has now been banned too, I wonder what the next user account will be?

dataworf

viksviks84 said:

Hi

I'm hoping someone can help me.

I bought a sofa in April 2021 on 29/06/2021 the plastic feet snapped, I contacted the company who sent me out more after approx 6 weeks

Upon turning the sofa on its side to fit the new feet it became clear that the screws damaged the wood and big chunks of wood was missing. I contacted the retailer for a refund (faulty goods), where they told me 'the feet weren't very good, I wasn't the first customer to complain and they wouldn't use that company again' , none of this helped me. I asked if they could send new, fit for purpose feet and they told me to 'look on ebay for wooden ones' they also stated they wouldn't refund me as their supplier wouldn't refund them.

I raised a S75 claim on my credit card, which was accepted.

Today, the retailer contacted me, stating I pay them back within 7 days by BACS or cash otherwise they are taking me too court as I have stolen the goods. 

Any ideas?
Thanks 

My understanding is, when your bank accepts and settles a Section 75 claim, it is a formal resolution to the dispute. As a result of this the retailer's issue is no longer with you but with the bank.

Threatening legal action for theft is a scare tactic from the company.

The correct legal avenue for the retailer would be to dispute the chargeback with the bank.

Do not pay them. You already have your money from the bank, and paying them would mean you've paid for the sofa twice.

Contact your bank and let them know the retailer is harassing you. Since the bank handled the Section 75 claim, they'll want to know the retailer is trying to get around that.

Keep a record of all their messages and calls. If they keep bothering you, this will be important proof (and helps reduce any headaches and annoyances you fell from being in the resulting situation).

If the retailer contact's you again, tell them politely but firmly that the matter has been settled with your bank and all future communication needs to go through them.

I hope you get it sorted.

eskbanker

dataworf said:

I hope you get it sorted.

That ship sailed some time ago, given that the thread is nearly four years old!

OP's later updates explain the rest of the story so there wasn't really any need to go right back to the first one....

dataworf

viksviks84 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Faults or otherwise, you can't expect to retain the sofa and the refund.

Totally agree, but if they won't come and collect the sofa what should I do? 

If they arrive at your home, tell your bank. Let your bank know the retailer is trying to harass you.

Write it down. Keep a record of everything that happened.

Don't back down. You are in the right, so don't let them intimidate you.

Sometimes required - call the police.

If you experience verbal aggression, repeated call backs, attempted forced entry, property damage, etc.

dataworf

eskbanker said:

dataworf said:

I hope you get it sorted.

That ship sailed some time ago, given that the thread is nearly four years old!

OP's later updates explain the rest of the story so there wasn't really any need to go right back to the first one....

I guess i'm tired. Sorry.