QDR Solicitors letter receieved for non payment of fuel

QrizB

You might want to begin your letter "As Registered Keeper of vehicle reg. no. XXNNXXX ..." so there's no chance of anyone construing that you're admitting to being the driver.

Aretnap

paul_c123 said:

Aretnap said:

paul_c123 said:

Baldytyke88 said:

TooManyPoints said:

I'm not familiar with this "holding fee" process. Does it require he cardholder o do anything after he has finished filling up?

It's usually automatic; perhaps the card was removed before the transaction could be completed?

It wouldn't/shouldn't have completed the pre-authorisation if the card was removed before it was complete.

It sounds like what's happened is there's an issue with the payment processing after the pre-auth was taken and after the fuel was taken, but it was Sainsbury's error. I don't think the OP owes Sainsbury's or QDR anything. Their error has effectively 'gifted' the fuel to him.

I'm not at all convinced that their error entitles the OP to free fuel. A debt doesn't go away simply because the creditor makes a mistake while collecting payment. 

There is no debt, the OP didn't enter into a credit agreement. They offered to pay, Sainsbury's didn't take it.

Nope, he (or whatever was driving the car, nudge nudge wink wink) took petrol knowing the price Sainsbury's were charging for it. By any reasonable standard he entered a contract to pay for it.

Aretnap

towills said:

user1977 said:

Just tell them you're not paying it, surely? They're hardly likely to take further action for £67.

Are you sure that i can tell them that im not paying? or do we appeal given the fact that I have an email from Credit Card bank that the user had entered the correct PIN at the Pump and holding fee of £100 was on the Pump system but for unknown reasons ( or reasosn known o Sainsburys) it didnt debit £52 after the fueling was completed.

There is nothing to "appeal". Nobody has made a judgement against you. You just have someone claiming that you owe them money.

If your neighbour claimed that you owed him money would you try to "appeal" or would you just tell him to jog on (perhaps explaining why you didn't owe him money)?

This is not fundamentally any different - the fact that the people writing to you have the word "solicitor" in their name doesn't give then superpowers or make them capable of using judgements that you have to appeal.

Aretnap

By the way, if it was your credit card that was used to authorize the pump, there's probably not a lot of point being too coy about whether it was you who took the fuel. Though if they tried to use the credit card transaction as evidence of the driver's identity, that might slightly undermine their claim that the driver drove off without offering payment...

QrizB

Aretnap said:

paul_c123 said:

There is no debt, the OP didn't enter into a credit agreement. They offered to pay, Sainsbury's didn't take it.

Nope, he (or whatever was driving the car, nudge nudge wink wink) took petrol knowing the price Sainsbury's were charging for it. By any reasonable standard he entered a contract to pay for it.

I'd suggest it's more like the olden days, where you'd pay by cheque. Then Sainsbury's lost the cheque, and are (for some reason) treating it like a drive-off.

Aretnap

QrizB said:

Aretnap said:

paul_c123 said:

There is no debt, the OP didn't enter into a credit agreement. They offered to pay, Sainsbury's didn't take it.

Nope, he (or whatever was driving the car, nudge nudge wink wink) took petrol knowing the price Sainsbury's were charging for it. By any reasonable standard he entered a contract to pay for it.

I'd suggest it's more like the olden days, where you'd pay by cheque. Then Sainsbury's lost the cheque, and are (for some reason) treating it like a drive-off.

Indeed, though if Sainsbury's lost the cheque they would still be entitled to seek alternative payment for the fuel. Though they wouldn't be entitled to claim additional costs - if anything it would be the other way around (you could probably deduct the bank fee for stopping the old cheque, for example).

It would be a different situation if you paid cash and Sainsbury's subsequently lost the cash of course: cash is actual payment, a cheque is merely a promise to pay.

paul_c123

Aretnap said:

paul_c123 said:

Aretnap said:

paul_c123 said:

Baldytyke88 said:

TooManyPoints said:

I'm not familiar with this "holding fee" process. Does it require he cardholder o do anything after he has finished filling up?

It's usually automatic; perhaps the card was removed before the transaction could be completed?

It wouldn't/shouldn't have completed the pre-authorisation if the card was removed before it was complete.

It sounds like what's happened is there's an issue with the payment processing after the pre-auth was taken and after the fuel was taken, but it was Sainsbury's error. I don't think the OP owes Sainsbury's or QDR anything. Their error has effectively 'gifted' the fuel to him.

I'm not at all convinced that their error entitles the OP to free fuel. A debt doesn't go away simply because the creditor makes a mistake while collecting payment. 

There is no debt, the OP didn't enter into a credit agreement. They offered to pay, Sainsbury's didn't take it.

Nope, he (or whatever was driving the car, nudge nudge wink wink) took petrol knowing the price Sainsbury's were charging for it. By any reasonable standard he entered a contract to pay for it.

Its not a creditor-debtor arrangement though. Its an exchange of payment (the credit card pre-authorisation was concluded) and a product (the petrol).

The issue is 100% Sainsbury's. They have not followed the correct steps to process the payment by presenting a credit card transaction after the true amount was known, using the valid pre-auth they had.

Sainsbury's have then shot themselves in the foot by passing it to QDR because 1) they both have no right whatsoever to demand payment (this is NOT a drive-off), 2) by going all legal, they have lost the opportunity to write politely to the OP, say their payment system made an error and they weren't charged, and ask for payment.

OP is 0% in the wrong here, I would advise next step is to do nothing. If QDR continue to contact them, report them for harrassment.

Cornucopia

It sounds as though there is a more fundamental system failure or system weakness that sainsburys need to properly investigate.   Whoever is approving legal escalation of failed transactions under a pre-authorisation arrangement really needs to properly understand that scenario and the practical and legal consequences of it.

TooManyPoints

It sounds as though there is a more fundamental system failure or system weakness that sainsburys need to properly investigate.

Having learned about the “pre-authorisation” process I quite agree. 

Having had their system failure pointed out to them by the OP I would have though that Sainsbury’s would have been more than willing to accept payment for the fuel (or perhaps maybe even write it off to show their gratitude). But they didn’t. So that’s two attempts that have been made to make the correct payment. The first failed because of a system failure; the second failed because of a “jobsworth” manager. 

That would be enough for me and I would do nothing further. If QDR make any further contact I would simply point that out to them and suggest they contact their client and ask them why they were instructed.

towills

Thanks for all the inputs guys...I'm slightly confused with the next steps...just keep quiet or write to Sainsburys copied to QDR asking why their system didnt charge at the pump?