Successful claims under sect 75 of the consumer credit act 1974 - are these legally binding?

Caz3121

[Deleted User] said:

There are some cases going on at the moment, so it is probably best to wait to see what the outcome of those is. You could write back to them with a copy of that advice. There is no need to worry yet, it's just an invoice and they will need to send a Letter Before Action giving you an opportunity to resolve the issue before going to court.

CMA pulled out of one https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-closes-investigation-into-british-airways-and-ryanair

Sandtree

CKhalvashi said:
My point (from experience) is that a bank will attempt to chargeback, even when S75 is specifically mentioned. It's always better to refund someone elses money than your own, as we all know.

The reasons are wider than just who's pocket it comes from. I have known for small chargebacks the bank just writes off the transaction and so it being from their own pocket as that was simpler for the low value than the universal hassle of a chargeback 

I have no doubt there will be cases where a person asks for a S75 and a chargeback is done instead however, as illustrated by the other similar S75 thread, in many cases people simply "raise a dispute" and so its the banks free choice. In that other thread the OP originally said they;d raised a S75 but then backed down and admitted it was a "dispute" but they didnt know of chargebacks on credit cards so had assumed it was a S75.

[Deleted User]

Caz3121 said:

[Deleted User] said:

There are some cases going on at the moment, so it is probably best to wait to see what the outcome of those is. You could write back to them with a copy of that advice. There is no need to worry yet, it's just an invoice and they will need to send a Letter Before Action giving you an opportunity to resolve the issue before going to court.

CMA pulled out of one https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-closes-investigation-into-british-airways-and-ryanair

Not exactly. From your link:

The CMA has concluded that a lack of clarity in the law makes it insufficiently certain that it would be able to secure refunds for customers of British Airways and Ryanair who were prevented from flying by Covid travel restrictions.

In other words they are saying that the law is unclear, which doesn't help anyone.

What is clear though is that the chargebacks were not "fraudulent" in any way. At best, a difference of opinion on interpretation of the law, influenced by government advice on the matter.

This badly needs a test case to sort it out.

In any case, ignore CKhalvashi's scaremongering. The OP isn't going to end up in court and will have many, many opportunities to mediate and to simply pay them back before then. At the moment the best thing to do is wait and see if any cases get decided and shed more light on the matter.

bagand96

Nobody knows the exact circumstances the OP found themselves in.  The first post talks about curtailment in March 2020 so it sounds like they were abroad and the holiday was cut short to return home.  That is a very different scenario from just not being able go on holiday due to lockdown rules.

I am by no means surprised to hear of companies asking for money back when there's been a chargeback.  Many sites and forums over the last 18 months have hailed chargeback as a magic wand that fixes everything.  Many people, albeit innocently, entered into the process without really understanding the ins and outs - they were just happy to get their cash back.  The banks didn't help as they were quite trigger happy on chargebacks without much investigation into the transaction terms and whether a refund was due or not.  Some of that is probably due to the shear volume of chargebacks being requested and banks not having the resource.  But you can guarantee they'd have been more thorough for Section 75 given it's their own money on the line!

Sandtree

bagand96 said:
The banks didn't help as they were quite trigger happy on chargebacks without much investigation into the transaction terms and whether a refund was due or not.  Some of that is probably due to the shear volume of chargebacks being requested and banks not having the resource.  But you can guarantee they'd have been more thorough for Section 75 given it's their own money on the line!

Long before Covid business have frequently said the process is loaded against them.

The reality is that the chargeback process is supposed to be simple and light touch and businesses are supposed to be in a better position to recover their monies if the process incorrectly returns funds than the customer is in to get their money back if the process incorrectly refuses to return the money.

elsien

Regardless of the interim debates about fraud or otherwise, chargebacks vs S75 etc, OP hasn’t given enough information about their circumstances to give any sort of meaningful opinion.
Regardless of what you think individual posters vested interests may or may not be, this shouldn’t detract from asking OP to be a lot clearer . 

Which is what CKhalvashi suggested in the first place. 

Sandtree

CKhalvashi said:

elsien said:

Regardless of the interim debates about fraud or otherwise, chargebacks vs S75 etc, OP hasn’t given enough information about their circumstances to give any sort of meaningful opinion.
Regardless of what you think individual posters vested interests may or may not be, this shouldn’t detract from asking OP to be a lot clearer . 

Which is what CKhalvashi suggested in the first place. 

Always good to see the same few posters derailing a thread with personal grudges meaning the OP now probably won't come back, which was exactly the situation I was trying to avoid.

Not exactly sure who that comment was aimed at however the OP's question... can the travel company chase them for money after a Chargeback was answered in the first couple of posts.

eskbanker

OP chose to start a new thread instead of updating this one, but I suggested that it would make more sense to continue here:

Further to my earlier post I am now taking independent legal advice against possible court proceedings by the holiday company following a successful chargeback with Mastercard.

The holiday company simply raised an invoice for the chargeback amount and applied it to my account with them. I have 30 days to pay. If I don't they will pursue this as a debt owing to them through the courts.

In summary. My holiday was curtailed - halfway through - arriving back home to the UK 7 days earlier than planned. On arrival at the holiday destination the schedule/tour started to fall apart almost immediately. International borders in the destination country closed on the day of arrival. I was on one of the last flights to arrive into that country. This closing of borders in this particular country was worldwide news a day or so prior to departure. I knew it was going to happen as did the holiday company. No cancelation was forthcoming from the holiday company but I could cancel and lose all my money. I chose not to do this. The UK governments FCO deemed it safe to travel so the holiday was going ahead with or without me. I was assured that should any changes to the tour/schedule that needed to be made whilst on holiday would be be managed by the travel company's guide. If I didn't get to see any of the major attractions or if the holiday was curtailed it would all be sorted out upon return to the UK and there would be a refund. These promises were made to myself and others on the same holiday who were all frantically making phone calls to the travel company days before departure.

On my return I got in touch with the holiday company about the promised refund. They in response pointed me in the direction of my travel insurer to make a claim. A major insurer and a gold star policy. I made a claim on my policy. They then turned me around and told me to go back to the holiday company to pursue a full refund as per government and CMA advice - consumers should receive a full refund from the holiday company in the case of curtailment.

Numerous emails were exchanged between myself and the holiday company as well as many others on the same holiday doing the same. The assurances that were made of refunds to all these people prior to departure were denied and refused. Holiday tokens were offered as recompense in the best outcomes. I didn't accept mine.

I and others turned to their credit card companies. I made a CLAIM UNDER SECTION 75 OF THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 with Mastercard. This is what the card company refer to it as. I submitted all my evidence. I was told this would be reviewed and a decision would be made if I could make a claim which they referred to as chargeback. After a while they came back and said my claim had been approved and a chargeback was going to be made. I received a partial 'refund' for the days that were lost due to the curtailment. My card was credited accordingly but the holidayl company would have 45 days to challenge. After 45 days the card company said it had been successful as the holiday company hadn't challenged the claim.

18 months later I receive the invoice from the holiday company I mention at the start of this post.

Sandtree

charlcombe007 said:

18 months later I receive the invoice from the holiday company I mention at the start of this post. Secret financial superhero? Not all the time, Rosie.

Not sure if @MSE_Rosie is Rosie Hamilton the MSE writer who wrote the Section 75 refunds: credit card protection’ - MSE (moneysavingexpert.com) article you are referring to.

S75 is oversold in many circumstances, it simply gives you a second party you can chase whereas some believe it gives them additional rights beyond what they had against the merchant.

In this case however a S75 claim hasnt been processed but a chargeback so the rant about the article is a little ungrounded. Your duplicate post suggests you said you wanted to raise a S75 and the bank said they'd do a chargeback... how did you request the S75 in the first instance? Many banks only have a "raise a dispute" process rather than explicitly chargeback or S75. When their response was a chargeback rather than S75 is there a reason you didnt raise it then? (fully accept you may not have known the difference but the fact you are sure you asked for a S75 suggests otherwise).

Ultimately if you think you explicitly raised a request for one thing and the bank did the other then raise a complaint with them. They may however decide that the evidence was sufficient to win a chargeback but would have failed on a S75 claim and therefore it'll be a token value they give for not communicating properly as the net outcome is at the moment not a detriment to you.

elsien

Was the advice that you would get a full refund? I thought curtailment was pro-rata, depending on what proportion of the holiday was used?