Refund refused due to excessive wear

Undervalued

eskbanker said:

Undervalued said:
Under some circumstances the banking regulations allow the buyer to prevent or reclaim a payment.

Unless we're talking about different things, chargeback is only a voluntary and non-statutory card scheme process rather than something actually covered by regulations as such?

Yes, perhaps regulations wasn't the right word to use.The point I was making was that the bank, in processing a chargeback, wasn't making a judgement that the OP was in the right and therefore didn't owe the supplier the money.

born_again

eskbanker said:

Pippa11 said:

@eskbanker so even though it is now in his account and cleared they might take it back again? 

Yes, they should state that in the cover letter.

Depends. Some do compliance on the call.

Pippa11

I must admit I don’t understand why the money has been credited back to his account if the process hasn’t been finalised yet. We raised the claim a few weeks ago and sent the evidence two weeks ago so why would they put the money in his account if the company could still dispute it? Seems an odd way of doing things, particularly as he’s 17 and could spend it all before the process is finished and as he’s not allowed an overdraft what would happen if they took it back again? 

eskbanker

Pippa11 said:

I must admit I don’t understand why the money has been credited back to his account if the process hasn’t been finalised yet. We raised the claim a few weeks ago and sent the evidence two weeks ago so why would they put the money in his account if the company could still dispute it? Seems an odd way of doing things, particularly as he’s 17 and could spend it all before the process is finished and as he’s not allowed an overdraft what would happen if they took it back again? 

As above, it's not unusual for refunds to be made provisionally, but they should explain this - in the mean time, emphasise to him that he shouldn't spend it!

born_again

Pippa11 said:

I must admit I don’t understand why the money has been credited back to his account if the process hasn’t been finalised yet. We raised the claim a few weeks ago and sent the evidence two weeks ago so why would they put the money in his account if the company could still dispute it? Seems an odd way of doing things, particularly as he’s 17 and could spend it all before the process is finished and as he’s not allowed an overdraft what would happen if they took it back again? 

This is the way chargebacks work & always have. Your bank sends chargeback to merchant bank & claims the money back. The retailer then has 45 days to contest. If they contest your bank should contact you to advise, but some do simply take the refund back.
If retailer does not contest, then you get to keep the refund (don't just count 45 days & think thats the end) as it can take longer to get through your banks system.
If they do not contest, then the merchant can take the legal route to claim the money back, as chargebacks are a card providers process that is over & above you legal consumer rights.

Pippa11

Thank you both, it doesn’t show as a chargeback on his account but as a refund directly from the company, is that normal practice? Also shows as cleared and not pending. I have told him not to spend it! 

eskbanker

Pippa11 said:

Thank you both, it doesn’t show as a chargeback on his account but as a refund directly from the company, is that normal practice? Also shows as cleared and not pending. I have told him not to spend it! 

I haven't had a chargeback for a while so can't comment on presentation but the money has effectively been clawed back from the merchant so not unreasonable to label it with their name.  I'd expect it to show as cleared rather than pending, as the latter generally just signifies a payment authorisation prior to settlement, so isn't applicable to this scenario.

born_again

Pippa11 said:

Thank you both, it doesn’t show as a chargeback on his account but as a refund directly from the company, is that normal practice? Also shows as cleared and not pending. I have told him not to spend it! 

Depends on the bank & their systems.
I know ours does not...

Okell

If it is a chargeback then does he need to send the shoes back again?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Worth a note, any one can sue any one, based on their terms, chances of them winning are very slim in my view and indeed for the value chances of them bothering are also slim (if they are sensible).