Section 75 and house insurance claim

Aylesbury_Duck

gerald2h said:

Thank you for your telephone call this afternoon.

 

I affirm that you informed Sarah Dillon (LV=) on 23rd February that you had initiated a S.75 claim with your credit card provider.  You & I briefly discussed this during our telephone conversation on 25th February, and I informed you that as far as I was aware at that time that your S.75 claim would not prejudice LV=’s recovery claim (and vice-versa).  It was not until 10th December that BLM informed me otherwise.

Who or what is BLM? 

What this email(?) seems to show is that whilst you pursued a twin-track approach at the outset, and it seemed ok to do so, it's now a problem.

Who paid out, when did they pay out, and for what?

y3sitsm3

gerald2h said:

Thank you for your telephone call this afternoon.

 

I affirm that you informed Sarah Dillon (LV=) on 23rd February that you had initiated a S.75 claim with your credit card provider.  You & I briefly discussed this during our telephone conversation on 25th February, and I informed you that as far as I was aware at that time that your S.75 claim would not prejudice LV=’s recovery claim (and vice-versa).  It was not until 10th December that BLM informed me otherwise.

All they've said is that you making an S75 claim won't affect your insurance claim, but it certainly doesn't mean you get to keep the money from the chargeback AND the insurance payout.

You need to reimburse the vendor.

Fosterdog

Which claim came through first? There is nothing wrong with a two track claim in an effort to be reimbursed but as soon as one of the two accepted your claim and paid out you should have cancelled the other claim. By continuing with the second claim after payout without informing them that your other claim was successful shows you have deliberately claimed twice.

You cannot keep both amounts.

pinkshoes

gerald2h said:

Thank you for your telephone call this afternoon.

 

I affirm that you informed Sarah Dillon (LV=) on 23rd February that you had initiated a S.75 claim with your credit card provider.  You & I briefly discussed this during our telephone conversation on 25th February, and I informed you that as far as I was aware at that time that your S.75 claim would not prejudice LV=’s recovery claim (and vice-versa).  It was not until 10th December that BLM informed me otherwise.

It means they won't prejudice each other so keep both claims going in case one didn't succeed.

But one did succeed at which point you needed to contact the other and stop it.

gerald2h

Thanks for the advice, I will reimburse the vendor tomorrow. 

Sandtree

gerald2h said:

Thank you for your telephone call this afternoon.

 

I affirm that you informed Sarah Dillon (LV=) on 23rd February that you had initiated a S.75 claim with your credit card provider.  You & I briefly discussed this during our telephone conversation on 25th February, and I informed you that as far as I was aware at that time that your S.75 claim would not prejudice LV=’s recovery claim (and vice-versa).  It was not until 10th December that BLM informed me otherwise.

So your insurers are recovering their costs from the trades people and so it may be this that the trades people are asking for you to refund to them rather than a chargeback/S75... it would still be easier if confirmed with your bank how it was processed