Section 75 complications

Hi, I don't know if anyone can advise on a claim I have made, which Tesco Bank have declined. In a nutshell, I manage a the home of my daughter and I rent out on Airbnb whilst she is working overseas this year. I pay for services and any repairs. We have a 50/50 split of the rental income after expenses. A couple of months ago the boiler packed up and I contacted an emergency boiler repair company. Anyway the whole thing was a scam and the charged me £360 for a incompetent man to turn up and obviously follow the same scam script to spend 1 minute(literally) diagnosing the problem as a heat exchanger...and then quoting £3500 to replace(which I didn't go for!).  I got a proper engineer in and the heat exchanger was fine. Anyway I put in a Section 75 and they seem to be happy about not getting what I paid for but have refused the claim on the basis that " the contract is for your daughters premises and Section 75 covers you as the primary cardholder only" and " the link between customer, bank and merchant has been broken because you do not benefit from the purchase"
I have pointed out that I have benefitted from the purchase as the property would be unrentable and therefore my income would cease. I can't understand how they can say the contract is with my daughters premises...when it seems clear that I had a contract with the merchant and the bank? I guess they are trying to say the services I paid for weren't directly for me and therefore not covered. Using this argument is it right that you can't make a claim for services on anything you as an individual don't actually own or that are, say, a present for someone else?   
A little long winded ...but if anyone can help I would be massively grateful as I'm keen to put up a fight!

Ian 

Replies

  • edited 6 September at 5:53PM
    dunstonhdunstonh Forumite
    110.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    edited 6 September at 5:53PM
    I believe Tesco are correct.

    For Section 75 to apply as there has to be a direct link between you and the supplier.   The property is owned by your daughter.  Not you.   Your daughter pays you as a separate commercial agreement but you don't own the property.     The failed service was to the benefit of your daughter.  Not to you.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • FarfetchFarfetch Forumite
    3.8K Posts
    1,000 Posts Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    Forumite
    IanWillis said:
    Hi, I don't know if anyone can advise on a claim I have made, which Tesco Bank have declined. In a nutshell, I manage a the home of my daughter and I rent out on Airbnb whilst she is working overseas this year. I pay for services and any repairs. We have a 50/50 split of the rental income after expenses. A couple of months ago the boiler packed up and I contacted an emergency boiler repair company. Anyway the whole thing was a scam and the charged me £360 for a incompetent man to turn up and obviously follow the same scam script to spend 1 minute(literally) diagnosing the problem as a heat exchanger...and then quoting £3500 to replace(which I didn't go for!).  I got a proper engineer in and the heat exchanger was fine. Anyway I put in a Section 75 and they seem to be happy about not getting what I paid for but have refused the claim on the basis that " the contract is for your daughters premises and Section 75 covers you as the primary cardholder only" and " the link between customer, bank and merchant has been broken because you do not benefit from the purchase"
    I have pointed out that I have benefitted from the purchase as the property would be unrentable and therefore my income would cease. I can't understand how they can say the contract is with my daughters premises...when it seems clear that I had a contract with the merchant and the bank? I guess they are trying to say the services I paid for weren't directly for me and therefore not covered. Using this argument is it right that you can't make a claim for services on anything you as an individual don't actually own or that are, say, a present for someone else?   
    A little long winded ...but if anyone can help I would be massively grateful as I'm keen to put up a fight!

    Ian 

    S75 requires a direct relationship between the card holder, the card provider and the service provider and for the card holder to be the beneficiary. There is no relationship here as it's your daughter's house.

    In terms of presents - if you bought car for your daughter but were intending it be used to take you out shopping, to events etc as you couldn't drive, that might have an argument, if you bought the car as a gift for the daughter to do whatever she wanted with, you wouldn't. Same sort of principle if you bought flights for the family including yourself to travel, but not if they were a gift and you were not going to travel

    He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery.

    -Harold Wilson


  • edited 21 September at 4:05PM
    phillwphillw Forumite
    4.8K Posts
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    edited 21 September at 4:05PM
    Using this argument is it right that you can't make a claim for services on anything you as an individual don't actually own or that are, say, a present for someone else? 
    The situation certainly makes it complicated.

    There isn't much else you could try than to say you want to make a complaint and then get the ombudsman to rule on it.

    They then might offer you some "go away money" to avoid that, which might not cover the entire cost but might be your best bet. 
  • DullGreyGuyDullGreyGuy Forumite
    600 Posts
    500 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    Farfetch said:
    IanWillis said:
    Hi, I don't know if anyone can advise on a claim I have made, which Tesco Bank have declined. In a nutshell, I manage a the home of my daughter and I rent out on Airbnb whilst she is working overseas this year. I pay for services and any repairs. We have a 50/50 split of the rental income after expenses. A couple of months ago the boiler packed up and I contacted an emergency boiler repair company. Anyway the whole thing was a scam and the charged me £360 for a incompetent man to turn up and obviously follow the same scam script to spend 1 minute(literally) diagnosing the problem as a heat exchanger...and then quoting £3500 to replace(which I didn't go for!).  I got a proper engineer in and the heat exchanger was fine. Anyway I put in a Section 75 and they seem to be happy about not getting what I paid for but have refused the claim on the basis that " the contract is for your daughters premises and Section 75 covers you as the primary cardholder only" and " the link between customer, bank and merchant has been broken because you do not benefit from the purchase"
    I have pointed out that I have benefitted from the purchase as the property would be unrentable and therefore my income would cease. I can't understand how they can say the contract is with my daughters premises...when it seems clear that I had a contract with the merchant and the bank? I guess they are trying to say the services I paid for weren't directly for me and therefore not covered. Using this argument is it right that you can't make a claim for services on anything you as an individual don't actually own or that are, say, a present for someone else?   
    A little long winded ...but if anyone can help I would be massively grateful as I'm keen to put up a fight!

    Ian 

    S75 requires a direct relationship between the card holder, the card provider and the service provider and for the card holder to be the beneficiary. There is no relationship here as it's your daughter's house.
    But they didnt buy a house, they paid for a repair man who didnt do their job. 

    1) Who's the account holder for the credit card? If its a secondary card then the Debtor for S75 is the account holder not you

    2) Who's name is on the invoice from the two engineers?

    Subject to the answer to the above two I am not sure I see the D-C-S relationship issue? If OP is primary account holder and the invoices were in their name the D-C-S is intact. There is nothing in S75 that says the debtor has to be the ultimate or sole beneficiary of the purchase.

    What was more of a concern however was that it was being repaired in relation to business activities (AirBnB)
  • FarfetchFarfetch Forumite
    3.8K Posts
    1,000 Posts Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    Forumite
    Farfetch said:
    IanWillis said:
    Hi, I don't know if anyone can advise on a claim I have made, which Tesco Bank have declined. In a nutshell, I manage a the home of my daughter and I rent out on Airbnb whilst she is working overseas this year. I pay for services and any repairs. We have a 50/50 split of the rental income after expenses. A couple of months ago the boiler packed up and I contacted an emergency boiler repair company. Anyway the whole thing was a scam and the charged me £360 for a incompetent man to turn up and obviously follow the same scam script to spend 1 minute(literally) diagnosing the problem as a heat exchanger...and then quoting £3500 to replace(which I didn't go for!).  I got a proper engineer in and the heat exchanger was fine. Anyway I put in a Section 75 and they seem to be happy about not getting what I paid for but have refused the claim on the basis that " the contract is for your daughters premises and Section 75 covers you as the primary cardholder only" and " the link between customer, bank and merchant has been broken because you do not benefit from the purchase"
    I have pointed out that I have benefitted from the purchase as the property would be unrentable and therefore my income would cease. I can't understand how they can say the contract is with my daughters premises...when it seems clear that I had a contract with the merchant and the bank? I guess they are trying to say the services I paid for weren't directly for me and therefore not covered. Using this argument is it right that you can't make a claim for services on anything you as an individual don't actually own or that are, say, a present for someone else?   
    A little long winded ...but if anyone can help I would be massively grateful as I'm keen to put up a fight!

    Ian 

    S75 requires a direct relationship between the card holder, the card provider and the service provider and for the card holder to be the beneficiary. There is no relationship here as it's your daughter's house.
    But they didnt buy a house, they paid for a repair man who didnt do their job. 

    1) Who's the account holder for the credit card? If its a secondary card then the Debtor for S75 is the account holder not you

    2) Who's name is on the invoice from the two engineers?

    Subject to the answer to the above two I am not sure I see the D-C-S relationship issue? If OP is primary account holder and the invoices were in their name the D-C-S is intact. There is nothing in S75 that says the debtor has to be the ultimate or sole beneficiary of the purchase.

    What was more of a concern however was that it was being repaired in relation to business activities (AirBnB)
    They paid a repair man as a gift for which they have no direct benefit, that is the crucial thing and why Tesco rejected it

    It's also a business purchase which further complicates things

    He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery.

    -Harold Wilson


  • edited 22 September at 2:21PM
    DullGreyGuyDullGreyGuy Forumite
    600 Posts
    500 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    edited 22 September at 2:21PM
    Farfetch said:
    Farfetch said:
    IanWillis said:
    Hi, I don't know if anyone can advise on a claim I have made, which Tesco Bank have declined. In a nutshell, I manage a the home of my daughter and I rent out on Airbnb whilst she is working overseas this year. I pay for services and any repairs. We have a 50/50 split of the rental income after expenses. A couple of months ago the boiler packed up and I contacted an emergency boiler repair company. Anyway the whole thing was a scam and the charged me £360 for a incompetent man to turn up and obviously follow the same scam script to spend 1 minute(literally) diagnosing the problem as a heat exchanger...and then quoting £3500 to replace(which I didn't go for!).  I got a proper engineer in and the heat exchanger was fine. Anyway I put in a Section 75 and they seem to be happy about not getting what I paid for but have refused the claim on the basis that " the contract is for your daughters premises and Section 75 covers you as the primary cardholder only" and " the link between customer, bank and merchant has been broken because you do not benefit from the purchase"
    I have pointed out that I have benefitted from the purchase as the property would be unrentable and therefore my income would cease. I can't understand how they can say the contract is with my daughters premises...when it seems clear that I had a contract with the merchant and the bank? I guess they are trying to say the services I paid for weren't directly for me and therefore not covered. Using this argument is it right that you can't make a claim for services on anything you as an individual don't actually own or that are, say, a present for someone else?   
    A little long winded ...but if anyone can help I would be massively grateful as I'm keen to put up a fight!

    Ian 

    S75 requires a direct relationship between the card holder, the card provider and the service provider and for the card holder to be the beneficiary. There is no relationship here as it's your daughter's house.
    But they didnt buy a house, they paid for a repair man who didnt do their job. 

    1) Who's the account holder for the credit card? If its a secondary card then the Debtor for S75 is the account holder not you

    2) Who's name is on the invoice from the two engineers?

    Subject to the answer to the above two I am not sure I see the D-C-S relationship issue? If OP is primary account holder and the invoices were in their name the D-C-S is intact. There is nothing in S75 that says the debtor has to be the ultimate or sole beneficiary of the purchase.

    What was more of a concern however was that it was being repaired in relation to business activities (AirBnB)
    They paid a repair man as a gift for which they have no direct benefit, that is the crucial thing and why Tesco rejected it

    It's also a business purchase which further complicates things
    Which clause in S75 excludes gifts or states that the debtor has to benefit from the purchase?

    You may also want to look at the likes of https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-3382396.pdf where the ombudsman rules that gifts are covered by S75 as long as the contract with the supplier is in the name of the debtor
Sign In or Register to comment.
Latest MSE News and Guides