We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Section 75 eligibility.
Comments
-
Does anyone know how to access the Ombudsman ruling? ThanksDullGreyGuy said:There is a case linked to on here many times exactly about a parent buying their child a car using their credit card.
The Ombudsman ruled, inline with the law, that as long as the credit card account holder is the legal purchaser of the vehicle it doesn't matter that the child is the registered keeper, that the car is delivered to them etc.
Unless there is a reason why they cannot get a basic credit card it would be less hassle for your son to get a credit card account in their own name and avoid the potential argument over if the DCS chain is broken or not.0 -
There is a case that says the opposite - this was an invoice and V5 in the name of the son thoughbs2005 said:
Does anyone know how to access the Ombudsman ruling? ThanksDullGreyGuy said:There is a case linked to on here many times exactly about a parent buying their child a car using their credit card.
The Ombudsman ruled, inline with the law, that as long as the credit card account holder is the legal purchaser of the vehicle it doesn't matter that the child is the registered keeper, that the car is delivered to them etc.
Unless there is a reason why they cannot get a basic credit card it would be less hassle for your son to get a credit card account in their own name and avoid the potential argument over if the DCS chain is broken or not.
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-5204823.pdf
Similar husband/wife rejected
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN5103020.pdf
maybe DullGreyGuy has the link for the one he mentionsSam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.1K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards