Section 75 claim rejected
in Credit cards
32 replies 904 views
in Credit cards
Can anyone help with this?
We own a property as tenants in common with our daughter who lives there.
My husband paid for new french doors on his credit card. The company supplying the doors has gone out of business.
He signed the contract but put our daughter's name and address on the contract as that was the address where the work was to be done.
The CC company are rejecting the Section 75 claim because they say the card holder must be the beneficiary.
We can't find this in any of the legislation - are they fobbing us off?
Latest MSE News and Guides
Martin and MSE campaign win
April's 20% energy price guarantee hike postponedMSE News
Childcare budget boost
More support for children from nine months and those on Universal CreditMSE News
Energy Price Guarantee calculator
How much you'll likely pay from AprilMSE Tools
(1)If the debtor under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement falling within section 12(b) or (c) has, in relation to a transaction financed by the agreement, any claim against the supplier in respect of a misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor.
Its that very innocuous debtor under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement that creates the requirement
So the only way you can get a different decision is if you can prove he was the contracting party. There is an FOS case that has been linked to a couple of times where a parent bought a car for their child as a gift and the garage incorrectly named the child on the invoice because it was what was going onto the V5 for the car. I cannot remember exactly what evidence they had but they convinced the FOS that the invoice was erroneous and actually the cardholder was the contracting party therefore the D-C-S relationship was intact.
If you cannot prove he is the contracting party then no S75 because there is no contract between the Debtor and the Supplier.
A defunct supplier is better dealt with as a chargeback though and then the D-C-S is irrelevant
The below cases provide some relevant context with regard to contracting parties and the debtor-creditor-supplier chain:
You need to read the contract he signed to see what it says.
Does it say that the contract is between your husband and the door company, or does it say that the contract is between your daughter and the door company? (And/or how would a reasonable person interpret the contract?)
(And to clarify - if the contract is between your daughter and the door company, just because your husband pays, it doesn't make him party to the contract.)
"Tenants in common" is a legal term that describes how ownership of a property is split. You'll find lots of info, if you google it.
Here's a random link thrown up by google: https://www.charcol.co.uk/guides/tenants-in-common/