Undelivered goods bought online

born_again

Manxman_in_exile said:

Ectophile said:

Alderbank said:

Olinda99 said:

If you had paid by eg debit card you would have had chargeback rights. 

You would, but they would have been no use to you here.
Chargeback rights are not the same as your statutory rights.
A chargeback claim for non-delivery fails if the seller has evidence of delivery anywhere, to anybody.
This comes as a surprise to some claimants.

I have no idea why you say that, as it totally contradicts what both Visa and MasterCard say on their own web sites.

I think @Alderbank says that because it is a point* that is made frquently by @born_again (who I think works in a bank) whenever the question of chargebacks and delivery comes up.

*ie that chargeback won't apply if there is proof of delivery, even if it's to the wrong address.  Certainly that is what I've understood born_again to be saying.

Yep.
All they need to do is prove delivery. Which the royal mail show it has.

Alderbank

Ectophile said:

Alderbank said:

Olinda99 said:

If you had paid by eg debit card you would have had chargeback rights. 

You would, but they would have been no use to you here.
Chargeback rights are not the same as your statutory rights.
A chargeback claim for non-delivery fails if the seller has evidence of delivery anywhere, to anybody.
This comes as a surprise to some claimants.

I have no idea why you say that, as it totally contradicts what both Visa and MasterCard say on their own web sites.

Ectophile, do you have links to these statements?

Manxman_in_exile

I'd be interested to know as well.

Manxman_in_exile

born_again said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

Ectophile said:

Alderbank said:

Olinda99 said:

If you had paid by eg debit card you would have had chargeback rights. 

You would, but they would have been no use to you here.
Chargeback rights are not the same as your statutory rights.
A chargeback claim for non-delivery fails if the seller has evidence of delivery anywhere, to anybody.
This comes as a surprise to some claimants.

I have no idea why you say that, as it totally contradicts what both Visa and MasterCard say on their own web sites.

I think @Alderbank says that because it is a point* that is made frquently by @born_again (who I think works in a bank) whenever the question of chargebacks and delivery comes up.

*ie that chargeback won't apply if there is proof of delivery, even if it's to the wrong address.  Certainly that is what I've understood born_again to be saying.

Yep.
All they need to do is prove delivery. Which the royal mail show it has.

@born_again -  do you happen to know if there is any rationale behind that, or is it just "one of those things"?

If the card providers have decided to come up with some consumer protection scheme over and above statutory rights, it's always seemed odd to me that they exclude delivery to a wrong address even when there is no doubt that it's gone to the wrong address.

Is there a good reason for that?

born_again

Manxman_in_exile said:

@born_again -  do you happen to know if there is any rationale behind that, or is it just "one of those things"?

If the card providers have decided to come up with some consumer protection scheme over and above statutory rights, it's always seemed odd to me that they exclude delivery to a wrong address even when there is no doubt that it's gone to the wrong address.

Is there a good reason for that?

From my understanding of their take, is to be fair to both parties, which they have to be or no retailer would take their cards. They can't blame retailer for something another party has done. Especially given that you would have consumer rights on the matter.

Years ago with Maestro they only non receipt chargeback was if it was a overseas company. UK based. No card protection. So it is a lot better now with Visa/Mastercard.

To be fair, the % that get rejected is very small, as many retailers simply just do not bother, or do not know that they can contest. But it is only fair to make people aware that they can be rejected. Or if not that retailer can chase for the debt.

End of the day "Non Receipt" means item not delivered. If someone has proof it has been delivered, then that is the end of the matter as far as the card regulations go.

Kingmonkey77

Thanks to everyone for the responses on this. 

Just to update I spoke with them two days ago and they kept trying to tell me that their policy means they can’t do anything about it. 

After a while with me refusing to accept that, they told me they would escalate it to their internal investigations department and today I received my refund. 

Thanks again for all your help