We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Declined Section 75 claim. No valid DCS link

1356789

Comments

  • Maegi
    Maegi Posts: 270 Forumite
    100 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    I may/may not - sounds like the roofers don't have merchant account so were using the OP card details to buy goods from the builders merchant. This would clearly not be the authorised transaction and therefore disputable. A paid invoice from the builders merchant to the roofers isn't really going to help the builders merchant either.

  • eskbanker
    eskbanker Posts: 42,056 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    "Clearly not the authorised transaction" only in the sense that it wasn't what OP was anticipating or wanting, but it's not clear to the card company (or the merchant) from what they can see, so in itself that doesn't necessarily open any avenues for OP to recover funds either from the card company or the merchant, especially if chargeback has already been tried, without success.

  • Maegi
    Maegi Posts: 270 Forumite
    100 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    It appears the roofing firm didn't actually process the transaction then pass the funds on to the merchant; so effectively the merchant didn't send the goods to the OP address or even ensure that it was him picking up the goods in person.

  • eskbanker
    eskbanker Posts: 42,056 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    It's unclear whether the merchant was even aware of OP's existence, so as far as they were concerned, they were entering into a transaction with the roofer!

  • Maegi
    Maegi Posts: 270 Forumite
    100 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    Therefore there was no agreement or contract between them.
    Simply an apparently fraudulent card transaction that the merchant shouldn't have accepted.

  • eskbanker
    eskbanker Posts: 42,056 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    Still unsure that the merchant has done anything wrong here, if there were effectively two separate contracts, one between OP and the roofer, and a different one between the roofer and the merchant (payment for which happened to be made with OP's card)?

    However, that wouldn't square with OP's card company apparently determining there to be four parties to one contract, so it would be illuminating to see their workings…

  • redux
    redux Posts: 23,148 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper

    If you phone a company and order something on the phone, their staff member does not continue to have access to.the card details. If you want to add something else to.the order you have to give the card details again

    I think that the roofing company should.not have stored the card details and given them to another company, and that other company should not have accepted the payment to their customer's account by a card that is in the name of another person, for goods not supplied to that person, without it being clear to that person what is happening, and without them talking directly to that person.

    I agree it is skating close to issues like fraud or information breaches.

    On here people are hypothesising a bit too much, including me. I'd suggest contacting Citizens Advice or people like that, who might have a better grip on these concepts than us vaguely theorising about it

    But you should presumably be able to talk to an ombudsman, if you've had what appears to be a final response

  • eskbanker
    eskbanker Posts: 42,056 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    Noble to be motivated by wanting to protect others but presumably your main priority is getting your money back, which is why we're kicking around the issues and trying to identify angles.

    And yes, as above, OP isn't remotely pejorative or condescending, it's simply standard forum shorthand for the thread starter…

  • fav68
    fav68 Posts: 21 Forumite
    10 Posts Name Dropper

    It's almost 6 months since I received the final decision letter. I think that the FOS is my only hope of getting any money back. Legal action against the roofing company is unlikely to produce anything.

    I'm puzzled about the telephone payment. Normally, when I buy something over the phone, the merchant would ask me for the name on the card and the delivery address. That didn't happen here. I was only asked via the roofer for the card number. the expiry date and the security number.

★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 355.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 456.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 248.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 605.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 179K Life & Family
  • 263.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.