Booking.com and S75

UTV

I was ripped off renting an apartment in Italy through Booking.com as it was nothing like as good as advertised.  I'm told i can't use Chargeback as we stayed in the apartment and therefore 'accepted the contract'. (we arrived at 8 p.m and had nowhere else to go).  I'm also told we can't use S75 as there can only be three parties involved, me the credit card company and the apartment owner.  Booking.com are involved and are a fourth party so I can't use S75!  Can anyone confirm if the reasons for turning down the Chargeback and the S75 claims are correct or could i take this further?

Voyager2002

The reason for turning down chargeback sounds absurd, but it is something I have heard before...

S75 is a little more complicated. There has to be a direct transaction between you and the vendor of the unsatisfactory product, so it would not be available if you used an agent to buy a product or service. In this case, you could argue that it was Booking.com who misrepresented the apartment to you, and so S75 could be used. S75 would not give any protection if the owner of the property ripped you off.

MEM62

In theory, there would always be a contract as there has been a sale so this would not be a reason for rejection.  Perhaps they have just worded this poorly and what they are trying to say is that you used the facility therefore you are obliged to pay for it.  As for the quality of the apartment, arguing about that is subjective and you might have a fight on your hands proving you case. 

The reasons for rejecting the S75 are legitimate as far as I am aware.        

DullGreyGuy

UTV said:

I was ripped off renting an apartment in Italy through Booking.com as it was nothing like as good as advertised.  I'm told i can't use Chargeback as we stayed in the apartment and therefore 'accepted the contract'. (we arrived at 8 p.m and had nowhere else to go).  I'm also told we can't use S75 as there can only be three parties involved, me the credit card company and the apartment owner.  Booking.com are involved and are a fourth party so I can't use S75!  Can anyone confirm if the reasons for turning down the Chargeback and the S75 claims are correct or could i take this further?

The S75 is correct, I think the chargeback probably is but @born_again has much better knowledge of the scheme rules

Chargeback is a basic system with simplistic rules, it's not intended to be a substitute to court or take up vast amounts of effort. As a consequence there are many simplifications which mean either can feel its unfair but ultimately the courts are there to resolve matters properly. There are many other cases like if tracking says a parcel is delivered you cannot chargeback even if the tracking showed it was delivered in a different county.

S75 requires the direct relationship between the Debtor (you), the Creditor (your card issuer) and the Supplier (apartment owner). The problem is that you effectively instructed the Creditor to give the money to Booking.com who then passes it to the Supplier meaning the Creditor has no relationship with the Supplier so S75 doesn't apply. 

born_again

If you stay in property than you have no right to claim back, as in effect you got what you paid for. Best you can do is stop one night & then move out. 
Then at least you might be able to claim the rest of the stay. But these types of claims are very subjective & do not have a good success rate.