Currys Iphone - failed delivery

eskbanker

born_again said:

 I can't see how the card company would be obliged to accept the supplier's version of events when processing a valid s75 claim

As S75 is based on holding finance provider jointly and severally liable, then if retailer said it was delivered, they can use that evidence. As such reach the same conclusion as the retailer.

Do you think they would take no notice of pertinent evidence/information that would allow them to avoid paying out?

Harsh on the OP.

I think you must be misunderstanding the point I'm making, in that I'm simply saying that a creditor receiving a s75 claim must assess the evidence from both parties, in response to your apparent assertion that the claim automatically fails if the supplier has evidence of delivery of a package, regardless of its contents.  Of course, ultimately the creditor will side with one or the other, but you seemed to be suggesting that proof of delivery trumps anything the claimant presents to evidence breach of contract!

born_again

 Afraid that is the way they will look at it. Not sure even a police CRN will help.

eskbanker

Looks like we're going to need to agree to disagree then, but if I raised a s75 claim that I hadn't received what I ordered (with evidence in the form of photos, etc) and it was rejected simply on the basis that the supplier demonstrated that 'a package' had been delivered, I'd be straight off to FOS like a shot (and/or starting a business sending out empty boxes)!

Alderbank

...and at the same time starting a business ordering stuff, keeping it then claiming that you hadn't received what you ordered!

You could even produce photos of yourself not receiving stuff.

That would teach them!

eskbanker

Alderbank said:

...and at the same time starting a business ordering stuff, keeping it then claiming that you hadn't received what you ordered!

You could even produce photos of yourself not receiving stuff.

That would teach them!

Point taken, but for the record I'm not suggesting that the customer's version of events should automatically take precedence over the supplier's, just that a creditor in receipt of a s75 claim needs to assess both and decide on relative credibility!

born_again

eskbanker said:

Looks like we're going to need to agree to disagree then, but if I raised a s75 claim that I hadn't received what I ordered (with evidence in the form of photos, etc) and it was rejected simply on the basis that the supplier demonstrated that 'a package' had been delivered, I'd be straight off to FOS like a shot (and/or starting a business sending out empty boxes)!

I get your point.