Help! Refused Refund for Unused Beauty Treatment – Weak Chargeback Case, What Are My Options?

Foxyvirginia

Hi everyone,

 

I’m looking for advice on a situation I’m currently stuck in with a beauty clinic and a failed refund request. I’ve tried going down the chargeback route via my credit card provider, but it’s not looking promising, and I feel totally cornered now. Here’s the full story:

 

🔹 What Happened:

      •     On 11 July 2025, I paid £580 in person at a pop-up clinic for a package of beauty treatment sessions using my MBNA credit card.

      •     A few days later, I decided not to go ahead with most of the sessions and gave them over 4 weeks’ notice before the next appointment.

      •     I requested a partial refund of £430 for the unused treatments.

 

🔹 Their Response:

      •     The clinic refused the refund, saying their Terms & Conditions state that courses are non-refundable.

      •     Instead, they offered to transfer the money to another treatment or let someone else use it – which they called a “gesture of goodwill.”

      •     The problem is that I was never shown or given any T&Cs at the time of payment.

      •     The only thing I signed was a consent form, which clearly stated I could “change my mind at any time.”

 

🔹 My Attempt at a Chargeback:

      •     I raised a chargeback request with MBNA under “services not received” or “misrepresentation of terms.”

      •     However, the bank told me my case is weak because the merchant’s T&Cs (which I never saw!) do say no refunds.

      •     They also warned that:

      •     The merchant has 45 days to dispute the chargeback, and if they do, the next treatment date will have already passed.

      •     This means I could end up with neither the treatment nor my money back.

      •     MBNA told me I can try a Section 75 claim after the chargeback fails, but they wouldn’t confirm if it would work.

      •     I also asked about going to the Financial Ombudsman, but they said I need to exhaust the bank’s process first.

 

🔹 Where I’m Stuck:

 

I really don’t want the treatment anymore – especially after all this back and forth. I just want my money back for services I haven’t received. But it seems like:

      •     The clinic is hiding behind T&Cs I was never shown.

      •     The chargeback probably won’t succeed.

      •     I’ll be past the second appointment date before it’s even resolved.

      •     Section 75 is uncertain.

      •     And the Ombudsman won’t help until the bank options are exhausted.

 

❓ Has anyone been through something similar?

      •     Do I have any stronger footing under consumer law due to the misleading consent form and hidden T&Cs?

      •     Is it worth pushing ahead with Section 75 anyway, or am I throwing good time after bad?

      •     Any other routes I might take?

 

Thanks in advance to anyone who reads this and can offer advice – I’m honestly at a loss

DE_612183

Did you ask to see their T&Cs?

Have you got a copy of the consent form?

One could argue that the "change you mind at any time" refers to receiving the treatment, and for that you can change you mind at any time - you don't have to go through with it. Signing a consent form is saying you accept the risk of the treatment being carried out.

Whether you get your money back is a different question.

powerful_Rogue

You made a purchase in person at their temporary business premises. You have no automatic legal right to cancellation for a change of mind.

The T&C's seems to be a red herring as no on-premises sales allow a change of mind return unless they specifically state they do.

The consent form doesn't appear to be misleading. When it says you can change your mind at any time, it means you can withdraw your consent at any time.

eskbanker

Foxyvirginia said:

I raised a chargeback request with MBNA under “services not received” or “misrepresentation of terms.”

The outcome of a chargeback claim is dependent on if or how the merchant chooses to respond - if they defend the claim then your card provider will generally reclaim any provisional refund, but even if the merchant doesn't dispute it within the 45 days, they could still pursue you at a later date.  It surprises me that MBNA would accept a claim for 'services not received' if you chose not to receive them, but I'm not familiar with 'misrepresentation of terms' as being a chargeback reason.

Anyway, all you can really do for now is to let that chargeback take its course and assess options thereafter - bear in mind that if the chargeback fails and you wish to go with s75 instead, you're claiming against MBNA rather than the merchant, i.e. MBNA won't be helping you but will be defending against you.  S75 claims are dependent on proving breach of contract or misrepresentation, the latter being a narrow legal definition rather than a casual vernacular interpretation.

Foxyvirginia said:

they offered to transfer the money to another treatment or let someone else use it – which they called a “gesture of goodwill.”

This sounds like a pragmatic resolution, can't you make this work?

MyRealNameToo

Foxyvirginia said:

Hi everyone,

 

I’m looking for advice on a situation I’m currently stuck in with a beauty clinic and a failed refund request. I’ve tried going down the chargeback route via my credit card provider, but it’s not looking promising, and I feel totally cornered now. Here’s the full story:

 

🔹 What Happened:

      •     On 11 July 2025, I paid £580 in person at a pop-up clinic for a package of beauty treatment sessions using my MBNA credit card.

      •     A few days later, I decided not to go ahead with most of the sessions and gave them over 4 weeks’ notice before the next appointment.

      •     I requested a partial refund of £430 for the unused treatments.

 

🔹 Their Response:

      •     The clinic refused the refund, saying their Terms & Conditions state that courses are non-refundable.

      •     Instead, they offered to transfer the money to another treatment or let someone else use it – which they called a “gesture of goodwill.”

      •     The problem is that I was never shown or given any T&Cs at the time of payment.

      •     The only thing I signed was a consent form, which clearly stated I could “change my mind at any time.”

 

🔹 My Attempt at a Chargeback:

      •     I raised a chargeback request with MBNA under “services not received” or “misrepresentation of terms.”

      •     However, the bank told me my case is weak because the merchant’s T&Cs (which I never saw!) do say no refunds.

      •     They also warned that:

      •     The merchant has 45 days to dispute the chargeback, and if they do, the next treatment date will have already passed.

      •     This means I could end up with neither the treatment nor my money back.

      •     MBNA told me I can try a Section 75 claim after the chargeback fails, but they wouldn’t confirm if it would work.

      •     I also asked about going to the Financial Ombudsman, but they said I need to exhaust the bank’s process first.

 

🔹 Where I’m Stuck:

 

I really don’t want the treatment anymore – especially after all this back and forth. I just want my money back for services I haven’t received. But it seems like:

      •     The clinic is hiding behind T&Cs I was never shown.

      •     The chargeback probably won’t succeed.

      •     I’ll be past the second appointment date before it’s even resolved.

      •     Section 75 is uncertain.

      •     And the Ombudsman won’t help until the bank options are exhausted.

 

❓ Has anyone been through something similar?

      •     Do I have any stronger footing under consumer law due to the misleading consent form and hidden T&Cs?

      •     Is it worth pushing ahead with Section 75 anyway, or am I throwing good time after bad?

      •     Any other routes I might take?

 

Thanks in advance to anyone who reads this and can offer advice – I’m honestly at a loss

What do you mean it was a "popup"?

Generally an in person contract has no right of cancellation unless it explicitly states there is therefore your presumption should have been it is non-cancellable unless you checked and they confirmed it was. 

What was the "consent" for? Sounds like the change your mind is in relation to the consent which is presumably something data protection related. 

Their offer to allow you to use the credit on some other form of treatment wasnt unreasonable if you decided the original booking wasnt for you for some reason. 

Note that the vendor gets 45 days to respond, that from the date they get notified not from the date you raise the issue. Similarly their response can take some time to get from their bank to your bank and be reviewed etc. Many set a diary for 45 days from the date of raising the issue and then are disappointed when a week or so after that reminder the money is taken back.

Some merchants feel that the chargeback process is loaded against them, not going to debate if it is or isnt. As such on one large small business forum they advise to ignore the charge back and instead use the time to prepare your Letter Before Action and the evidence for making your court claim against the customer. As such you may "win" because the merchant doesnt respond but you may also then find court papers landing on your doorstep a few weeks or months later. 

born_again

Even if you could argue the point that a popup (where was that) is not a in person purchase, as it is not their normal place of business.

You cancelled the further appointments. So as far as chargebacks go that is not only weak, it is something that should not have been done.
Same with S75. As the retailer have not breached the course you paid for.

But as @eskbanker this is going to depend on merchant contesting the chargeback. Just be aware that if they do not, then you get the money back. The retailer can they chase you via courts for the funds on the basis of breach of contract.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

You made a purchase in person at their temporary business premises. You have no automatic legal right to cancellation for a change of mind.

I'm not actually so sure on that point, an off premises contract is defined as

(a)

a contract concluded in the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer, in a place which is not the business premises of the trader;

(b)

a contract for which an offer was made by the consumer in the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer, in a place which is not the business premises of the trader;

(c)

a contract concluded on the business premises of the trader or through any means of distance communication immediately after the consumer was personally and individually addressed in a place which is not the business premises of the trader in the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer;

(d)

a contract concluded during an excursion organised by the trader with the aim or effect of promoting and selling goods or services to the consumer;

Random guidance here: 

https://enterprise.gov.ie/en/legislation/legislation-files/guidance-note-on-the-european-union-consumer-information-cancellation-and-other-rights-regulations-2013.pdf

The first three parts of the definition of “off-premises” contract refer to a contract concluded in a

place “which is not the business premises of the trader”. “Business premises” is defined as:

 a) any immovable retail premises where a trader carries out his activity on a permanent basis; or

 b) any movable retail premises where a trader carries out his activity on a usual basis.

A regular stall at a country market, for example, is a business premises therefore, and a contract

concluded at such a premises would not be an off-premises contract. A “pop-up” store used by a

trader on a purely temporary basis is likely to fall outside the definition of “business premises” and,

if so, contracts concluded in such a store would be classified as off-premises contracts. The

distinction between ‘permanent’ or ‘usual’ use and temporary or exceptional use may not be clearcut, however, and will have to be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case. In line with

the European Court of Justice judgment in Travel Vac,

13 a relevant criterion will be whether or not

the premises is one that is clearly identified as a business premises. 

If it were off-premises and no right to cancel was given via a durable means OP would be entitled to cancel within 1 year and 14 days and receive a full refund (regardless of any services being received). 

I think main question is what is a beauty clinic offering here and whether that falls under services related to leisure activities, if however the payment is broken down in a manner than means S75 applies (in terms of the £100 min) that, and any disagreement over off-premises, are points for the bank to articulate otherwise really. 

OP if your chargeback fails yes go down S75 route assuming amount applies, bank is unlikely to go to court in order to defend a claim for £580. 

OP main thing to do is message the beauty clinic using a medium were you have a record and say

"With regards to my contract for (xxxx invoice number, etc) I am notifying you of my intention to cancel the contract under The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013"

That's all you need to say and then it's down to the bank to argue with you about the finer points of consumer law (which are pointless to debate here IMO as none of us really know the answer unless there is further case law or more recent guidance to note) when you make your S75 claim. 

If the bank are obstructive just send them a Letter Before Action then file small claims, unless you are seeking any compensation from the Ombudsman for being treated unfairly by the bank I personally wouldn't bother with the Ombudsman. 

If you need more specifics please post back for more advice. 

powerful_Rogue

on-premises contracts. The Regulations define an 'on-premises contract' as "a contract which is neither off-premises nor a distance contract", which effectively means a contract made on business premises, whatever they may be. Please note, however, that this is designed to be a 'catch all' category and covers every contract that does not fall within the 'off-premises' or 'distance' categories; therefore, it does not necessarily relate to where the contract is made

'Business premises' includes a trader's permanent premises as well as temporary premises (such as a market stall) where the trader usually operates. This is a key definition with regard to the above contract types, but it is not defined clearly by the Regulations.

https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/on-premises-sales/consumer-contracts-on-premises-sales

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

on-premises contracts. The Regulations define an 'on-premises contract' as "a contract which is neither off-premises nor a distance contract", which effectively means a contract made on business premises, whatever they may be. Please note, however, that this is designed to be a 'catch all' category and covers every contract that does not fall within the 'off-premises' or 'distance' categories; therefore, it does not necessarily relate to where the contract is made

'Business premises' includes a trader's permanent premises as well as temporary premises (such as a market stall) where the trader usually operates. This is a key definition with regard to the above contract types, but it is not defined clearly by the Regulations.

https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/on-premises-sales/consumer-contracts-on-premises-sales

That's the same as my post, key word being usually

A pop up shop by it's name isn't a regular occurrence. Of course the beauty clinic may use it once a month or whatever and should that be such it would likely be leaning towards on premises but that is for the bank to establish and articulate (or for OP to correct any information that was unclear). 

MyRealNameToo

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

on-premises contracts. The Regulations define an 'on-premises contract' as "a contract which is neither off-premises nor a distance contract", which effectively means a contract made on business premises, whatever they may be. Please note, however, that this is designed to be a 'catch all' category and covers every contract that does not fall within the 'off-premises' or 'distance' categories; therefore, it does not necessarily relate to where the contract is made

'Business premises' includes a trader's permanent premises as well as temporary premises (such as a market stall) where the trader usually operates. This is a key definition with regard to the above contract types, but it is not defined clearly by the Regulations.

https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/on-premises-sales/consumer-contracts-on-premises-sales

That's the same as my post, key word being usually

A pop up shop by it's name isn't a regular occurrence. Of course the beauty clinic may use it once a month or whatever and should that be such it would likely be leaning towards on premises but that is for the bank to establish and articulate (or for OP to correct any information that was unclear). 

I think you are over estimating the level of investigation done on a chargeback; it's a very basic tool with basic rules. It's not a court of law or anything else.

The classic example is on non-delivery of goods; if the merchant can show a tracker that shows it was delivered then they will win. The customer can point out the photo evidence on the tracker is of a yellow door and point out that they are in a conservation zone which requires every door in the whole village to be painted black so its clearly been misdelivered the chargeback will still not be upheld. 

Under S75, which is a more permanent resolution, though still short of the ombudsman or courts, there would be more opportunity to try and argue it was an off premises sale and therefore cooling off periods should apply. 

That said, the OP should clarify what they mean a "popup", certainly in Westfield London there are things you could call such but they've been there with the same company occupying it for over a decade. 

The final consideration will be the exclusion of "leisure activities to be performed on a specified date". Not sure if beauty treatments can be considered in scope for the exclusion (certainly it is wide) and if all the dates have been pre-booked, it seems like it as they say they've had one and the next is within the next 45 days. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

MyRealNameToo said:

I think you are over estimating the level of investigation done on a chargeback; it's a very basic tool with basic rules. It's not a court of law or anything else.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

OP if your chargeback fails yes go down S75 route assuming amount applies

 

MyRealNameToo said:

Under S75, which is a more permanent resolution, though still short of the ombudsman or courts

Section 75 merely holds the credit provider jointly liable, the bank may have their own internal processes to deal with customers seeking a resolution under S75 but ultimately there isn't any obligation for the consumer to use them. 

There is an obligation to mitigate losses but is a bank really going to spend thousands going to court to argue the consumer shouldn't be awarded costs because they didn't use their processes, highly doubtful, especially when the courts have set rules (including for example sending an LBA) for parties to follow when making claims, banks haven't been awarded their own set of special rules in that regard   

MyRealNameToo said:

The final consideration will be the exclusion of "leisure activities to be performed on a specified date". Not sure if beauty treatments can be considered in scope for the exclusion (certainly it is wide) and if all the dates have been pre-booked, it seems like it as they say they've had one and the next is within the next 45 days. 

Yes, the limit of "on a specified date" is to be interpreted narrowly but leisure is very undefined and I think you'd be looking at that on a case by case basis unless there is any UK or EU case law on this specific point (I don't believe there is any, or at least could only find a preliminary hearing regarding a cancelled concert).