Section 75 Settlement Offer

Family_guy_uk

We had a bathroom fitted starting in 2021 and paid with credit card. The merchant messed us around but they finally finished the work in early 2022. By late 2022 defects started to show and we contacted them to fix things but they ignored us. I lodged a section 75 claim in December and (after much back and forth including a 3rd party defect report) the cc company has just offered a settlement of the original monies paid to the merchant. The report showed we needed to replace the whole thing.  With inflation and rising costs etc we can't replace the bathroom for the original price we paid. The report estimated it would cost £1000 more than we originally paid.

My question is, does the law governing section 75 state the cc company should just refund the money paid or in fact provide the money needed to replace what was originally purchased?

Thanks

DullGreyGuy

The law is very simple and short, it's only 5 clauses long. It simply states the liability the supplier has for misrepresentation or breach of contract is mirrored to the creditor.

If you can demonstrate the supplier would be liable under contract law then so is your bank.  

Family_guy_uk

DullGreyGuy said:

The law is very simple and short, it's only 5 clauses long. It simply states the liability the supplier has for misrepresentation or breach of contract is mirrored to the creditor.

If you can demonstrate the supplier would be liable under contract law then so is your bank.  

Yes I understand the liability and the bank has admitted this and offered a full refund as settlement. My question is should I be asking them to cover the cost of replacing the bathroom which is more than we originally paid 18 months back?

DullGreyGuy

Family_guy_uk said:

DullGreyGuy said:

The law is very simple and short, it's only 5 clauses long. It simply states the liability the supplier has for misrepresentation or breach of contract is mirrored to the creditor.

If you can demonstrate the supplier would be liable under contract law then so is your bank.  

Yes I understand the liability and the bank has admitted this and offered a full refund as settlement. My question is should I be asking them to cover the cost of replacing the bathroom which is more than we originally paid 18 months back?

It's ultimately up to you... under the CRA they could be discounting the refund to reflect the use you've had before the issues arose. At the same time the CRA allows for damages beyond the contract value to be added. The risk of rejecting an offer is that they could come back with a lower value. 

HillStreetBlues

If you had the bathroom redone and cost you £1000 more it you could claim "consequential loss"  as that £1000  comes about because the original contract wasn't fulfilled. But ATM you haven't suffered that loss and don't think a future loss can be claimed for.

born_again

Family_guy_uk said:

DullGreyGuy said:

The law is very simple and short, it's only 5 clauses long. It simply states the liability the supplier has for misrepresentation or breach of contract is mirrored to the creditor.

If you can demonstrate the supplier would be liable under contract law then so is your bank.  

Yes I understand the liability and the bank has admitted this and offered a full refund as settlement. My question is should I be asking them to cover the cost of replacing the bathroom which is more than we originally paid 18 months back?

You can ask. They may or may not cover it.
But I would expect them to want to see quotes & possibly conformation that this work is going to be undertaken.

Family_guy_uk

Just to close this out and in case others may find this useful I did challenge the initial offer not meeting the cost of replacement and mentioned consequential losses. 6 weeks later the cc company offered an additional £1500 to cover full replacement at current prices.

martinbainbridge1975

Family_guy_uk said:

Just to close this out and in case others may find this useful I did challenge the initial offer not meeting the cost of replacement and mentioned consequential losses. 6 weeks later the cc company offered an additional £1500 to cover full replacement at current prices.

that's a decent result