UK commits to reform of the Consumer Credit Act

MikeJXE

MattMattMattUK said:

I agree S75 has to go, as do many of the protections for when people are idiots. What ultimately happens is those costs are passed onto the rest of us who do not put our credit card details into random sites or buy from dodgy traders, the same with the banks being made to refund amounts when customers choose to transfer all their money to fraudsters, that cost is then passed onto the rest of us which is ultimately unfair. 

I totally agree with you on that 

There are far too many idiots given the responsibility of handling money, being taken for the idiots they are then asking the banks and credit companies  to refund them, a refund we all pay for. 

[Deleted User]

TheMaverick000000 said:

They should get rid of those EU banking laws that criminalise ordinary law-abiding citizens. Bank accounts should be a human right. Currently, banks are cancelling those rights.

Totally subjective.

LeesArt

Any changes to Section 75 should be to IMPROVE Consumer Rights not demote them.

This is such a vote loser, week after week and day after day we hear on consumer call ins how section 75 saved the day.

Any change would suggest that the Gov is getting some sort of donation or on the take, I see no valid reason to change it.

I will be writing to my MP to explain my concerns and I suggest all members here do the same.

pushpull

LeesArt said:

Any changes to Section 75 should be to IMPROVE Consumer Rights not demote them.

This is such a vote loser, week after week and day after day we hear on consumer call ins how section 75 saved the day.

Any change would suggest that the Gov is getting some sort of donation or on the take, I see no valid reason to change it.

I will be writing to my MP to explain my concerns and I suggest all members here do the same.

Sure, but why not take it a step further and have every transaction backed by the government?  That way if anything goes wrong you'll never fail to get your money back.

Of course, it'll be the taxpayer that foots the bill for it and many people would query why people's purchases should be backed by the state.

This isn't in practice much different to S75 (except CC providers are a little more likely to go bump). It's a quirk of the law that allows it to be used against CC providers who simply pass this cost onto everyone who has a credit card in some shape or form, and quite a few people don't particularly like subsidising that.