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.
Declined Section 75 claim. No valid DCS link
Comments
-
You can escalate to FOS within six months of the institution's final response to your complaint (separately from the actual S75 or chargeback claims), are you saying that this all happened over six months ago and that you went through the card company's complaints process thereafter?
1 -
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.
1 -
"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.
1 -
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.
1 -
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!
1 -
Therefore there was no agreement or contract between them.
Simply an apparently fraudulent card transaction that the merchant shouldn't have accepted.1 -
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…
1 -
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
0 -
OP = Original Poster.
0 -
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…
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 355.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.9K Spending & Discounts
- 247.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 605.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.8K Life & Family
- 262.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards