John Lewis Financial Services and Section 75 problem - IKEA goods.

eskbanker

born_again said:

eskbanker said:

born_again said:

If this is a purchase you made in person, then there are no dispute rights via your card provider. As you have chance to resolve any problems at that point. So that is a covers a contactless or chip/pin transaction.

I'm not sure if there's some sort of terminology issue here and that not everyone is on the same page, but surely 'not as described' or quality issues can legitimately arise from a face-to-face transaction, and in particular something such as a flat-packed box from IKEA, where the customer has no meaningful ability to inspect the goods prior to leaving the premises?

As card regulations are over & above your consumer rights. Card co's exclude in person purchases from their chargeback regulations.

Yes, I appreciate that it's not a regulatory or legislative matter but was unaware of a blanket exemption preventing any chargeback claims for an in-person transaction, even for 'not as described', etc (it obviously wouldn't apply to 'not received'!).

I don't ever recall seeing this limitation mentioned before and can't find any reference to it in any of the usual guides (MSE, Which?, etc), although these are inevitably superficial in many areas - do you have any specific citation from a published source that clarifies this, as I find the card scheme rules quite impenetrable?

max...

Thanks for all the input everyone - it's a difficult one as it was a packaged item that was sealed and obviously could not be examined until opened.

visidigi

max... said:

Thanks for all the input everyone - it's a difficult one as it was a packaged item that was sealed and obviously could not be examined until opened.

Does what you order different from the displayed model or was the item not on display and picked from the warehouse/marketplace sealed/packaged?

born_again

@eskbanker
Sadly not, as they are all work system based.

Ectophile

I think I should point out that "chargeback" and Section 75 are completely different things. People tend to muddle them up, and that includes bank staff.

Chargeback is a voluntary scheme covering credit and debit cards, that the banks have signed up to.

Section 75 is part of the Consumer Credit Act. It's the law, and banks cannot choose for themselves whether or not it applies to a transaction. If you have a legal claim against a retailer, then you have the same claim against the credit card company.

max...

visidigi said:

max... said:

Thanks for all the input everyone - it's a difficult one as it was a packaged item that was sealed and obviously could not be examined until opened.

Does what you order different from the displayed model or was the item not on display and picked from the warehouse/marketplace sealed/packaged?

It was a sealed, self picked item.  Presumably the display item was the same but the quality of our example once examined was not acceptable.

sheramber

 Presumably the display item was the same but the quality of our example once examined was not acceptable.

But is it the same quality as the display model?

Your statement would suggest you did not see the display model.

max...

Sorry, no - ours is poorly manufactured - i.e. misshapen and uneven.

shiraz99

max... said:

Sorry, no - ours is poorly manufactured - i.e. misshapen and uneven.

So what exactly did you purchase. Sounds like there may not actually be any breach of contract here.

Manxman_in_exile

Ectophile said:

I think I should point out that "chargeback" and Section 75 are completely different things. People tend to muddle them up, and that includes bank staff.

Chargeback is a voluntary scheme covering credit and debit cards, that the banks have signed up to.

Section 75 is part of the Consumer Credit Act. It's the law, and banks cannot choose for themselves whether or not it applies to a transaction. If you have a legal claim against a retailer, then you have the same claim against the credit card company.

Thank you.  I can't understand why this thread has been diverted into a discussion about the rules of card providers when it's  clearly about a s75 claim (isn't it?).

I also can't understand why JL are blathering on about not applying to instore purchases.  Just because you've bought something instore doesn't mean you've had a chance to compare it against a display item.