Secondhand car dispute.

emma5461

I bought a used Fiat 500 back in August 24. I found it through Car Guru, before purchase I checked the website it was advertised on, the MOT history and the reviews for the garage. All was good so, I went to view the vehicle. I put down a £200 deposit and asked for the car to have a new MOT before I paid the rest. The car passed with no advisories so I went ahead with the sale. I noticed the invoice was different to the company I thought I was buying from, but they said it was because they had recently changed names. I paid by credit card thinking if anything went wrong I would be protected. Shortly afterwards it did- I contacted the company and they ignored me, so I raised a section 75 claim with Barclaycard. After several months of back and forth they have said there is nothing they can do as the invoice name and the name on the credit card transaction are not the same. I’ve checked and the invoice company name does not exist- the address they have given is spelt incorrectly and the address they claim to be in has another company occupying it which don’t appear to have anything to do with the car company. Barclaycard say as the invoice can’t be linked to the car company there is nothing they can do, even though it looks like the car company has created a false invoice in order to avoid any comeback from the car.

Aylesbury_Duck

emma5461 said:

I bought a used Fiat 500 back in August 24. I found it through Car Guru, before purchase I checked the website it was advertised on, the MOT history and the reviews for the garage. All was good so, I went to view the vehicle. I put down a £200 deposit and asked for the car to have a new MOT before I paid the rest. The car passed with no advisories so I went ahead with the sale. I noticed the invoice was different to the company I thought I was buying from, but they said it was because they had recently changed names. I paid by credit card thinking if anything went wrong I would be protected. Shortly afterwards it did- I contacted the company and they ignored me, so I raised a section 75 claim with Barclaycard. After several months of back and forth they have said there is nothing they can do as the invoice name and the name on the credit card transaction are not the same. I’ve checked and the invoice company name does not exist- the address they have given is spelt incorrectly and the address they claim to be in has another company occupying it which don’t appear to have anything to do with the car company. Barclaycard say as the invoice can’t be linked to the car company there is nothing they can do, even though it looks like the car company has created a false invoice in order to avoid any comeback from the car.

If you can verify the business name and address of the place you bought it from, small claims court action is available to you.  If you can't, then I'm afraid you've reached the end of the road.  What's the problem with the car, and what outcome are you seeking?

born_again

What's the issue with the car?

Ectophile

Aylesbury_Duck said:

emma5461 said:

I bought a used Fiat 500 back in August 24. I found it through Car Guru, before purchase I checked the website it was advertised on, the MOT history and the reviews for the garage. All was good so, I went to view the vehicle. I put down a £200 deposit and asked for the car to have a new MOT before I paid the rest. The car passed with no advisories so I went ahead with the sale. I noticed the invoice was different to the company I thought I was buying from, but they said it was because they had recently changed names. I paid by credit card thinking if anything went wrong I would be protected. Shortly afterwards it did- I contacted the company and they ignored me, so I raised a section 75 claim with Barclaycard. After several months of back and forth they have said there is nothing they can do as the invoice name and the name on the credit card transaction are not the same. I’ve checked and the invoice company name does not exist- the address they have given is spelt incorrectly and the address they claim to be in has another company occupying it which don’t appear to have anything to do with the car company. Barclaycard say as the invoice can’t be linked to the car company there is nothing they can do, even though it looks like the car company has created a false invoice in order to avoid any comeback from the car.

If you can verify the business name and address of the place you bought it from, small claims court action is available to you.  If you can't, then I'm afraid you've reached the end of the road.  What's the problem with the car, and what outcome are you seeking?

The trouble is that while the chances of winning in court may be quite high, the odds of getting any money are much less.  By the time you win, the company will have disappeared and been replaced by another one.

Okell

Aylesbury_Duck said:

emma5461 said:

I bought a used Fiat 500 back in August 24. I found it through Car Guru, before purchase I checked the website it was advertised on, the MOT history and the reviews for the garage. All was good so, I went to view the vehicle. I put down a £200 deposit and asked for the car to have a new MOT before I paid the rest. The car passed with no advisories so I went ahead with the sale. I noticed the invoice was different to the company I thought I was buying from, but they said it was because they had recently changed names. I paid by credit card thinking if anything went wrong I would be protected. Shortly afterwards it did- I contacted the company and they ignored me, so I raised a section 75 claim with Barclaycard. After several months of back and forth they have said there is nothing they can do as the invoice name and the name on the credit card transaction are not the same. I’ve checked and the invoice company name does not exist- the address they have given is spelt incorrectly and the address they claim to be in has another company occupying it which don’t appear to have anything to do with the car company. Barclaycard say as the invoice can’t be linked to the car company there is nothing they can do, even though it looks like the car company has created a false invoice in order to avoid any comeback from the car.

If you can verify the business name and address of the place you bought it from, small claims court action is available to you.  If you can't, then I'm afraid you've reached the end of the road.  What's the problem with the car, and what outcome are you seeking?

Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment...

Haven't Barclaycard got this wrong?  Perhaps intentionally...

s75 makes the credit provider jointly and severally liable with the trader in respect of any legal claim that the consumer might have against the trader.

If you're suggesting that the OP can sue the trader (whoever that is) in these circumstances, then I don't see why s75 wouldn't apply and I don't see why Barclaycard are arguing that they aren't liable.

I'm not convinced that just because the invoice is in the name of a bogus trader that s75 doesn't apply.  The fact remains that Barclaycard have facilitated the sale by providing credit to the OP and by processing a CC payment to the trader.  And Barclaycard have a better idea than the OP of who was the recipient of the payment.

eskbanker

Just speculating, but Barclaycard may effectively be asserting that the requisite debtor-creditor-supplier link has been broken, by virtue of the payment being made to a different party from the supplier?  I agree that this may be a technicality though, if OP believed they were paying the correct entity....

Okell

@eskbanker -  yes, I'm sure Barclaycard would argue that.

Whether it would work to avoid - no, let's say evade - liability, I dunno.

Seems to me that Barclaycard are trying to have their cake and eat it.

On the one hand they seem perfectly happy to process the payment even though it's being made on a "fake" invoice, but they don't want to accept the responsibility associated with that.

It's not clear to me what a consumer is meant to do in these circumstances.  They see a car they want to buy; the seller proffers an invoice; the consumer pays by credit card.  Are they meant to check that the card machine they're paying on is being used on behalf of the business entity on the invoice?  How would they do that?

Seems to me that the fact that the seller is employing some sort of subterfuge is neither here nor there with regards to s75 liability.

I'll go further and suggest Barclaycard are jointly and severally liable for the subterfuge

eskbanker

It's one thing to be sympathetic with a customer who's been caught out by apparent subterfuge, but an entirely different one to assert that Barclaycard are legally on the hook under s75 as a result of this - it would though be interesting to see how FOS adjudicate if it ends up there, given their stance on judging not just on narrow legal technicalities but what they consider to be fair.

sheramber

Okell said:

@eskbanker -  yes, I'm sure Barclaycard would argue that.

Whether it would work to avoid - no, let's say evade - liability, I dunno.

Seems to me that Barclaycard are trying to have their cake and eat it.

On the one hand they seem perfectly happy to process the payment even though it's being made on a "fake" invoice, but they don't want to accept the responsibility associated with that.

It's not clear to me what a consumer is meant to do in these circumstances.  They see a car they want to buy; the seller proffers an invoice; the consumer pays by credit card.  Are they meant to check that the card machine they're paying on is being used on behalf of the business entity on the invoice?  How would they do that?

Seems to me that the fact that the seller is employing some sort of subterfuge is neither here nor there with regards to s75 liability.

I'll go further and suggest Barclaycard are jointly and severally liable for the subterfuge

As far as Barclaycard are concerned their machine is linked to company A and all payments are through that company. 

They have no knowledge of what company name is on the invoice. They never see the invoice.

Company B on the invoice is not who they made payment to. They paid  company  A.

They have no relationship with the payment  to company B..

 There  could  be two entities trading from the same place and wrong cc machine used. 

They could have changed their name but not advised  Barclaycard.

Or, they could be dodgy traders.