Declined Section 75 claim. No valid DCS link

HillStreetBlues

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094305#Comment_82094305

I take £500 from a till without authorisation and leave a cheque there for the same amount, is that OK as the net effect is the same? Just because the result might correct, the method of getting has to matter.

OP reports to the card holder unauthorised use of card.

born_again

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094250#Comment_82094250

No fraud by the roofer. OP willingly gave them the card detail in order to try & gain S75 rights on the work being done.

OP should not have done that.

redux

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094178#Comment_82094178

Believe it or not, card companies do have better anti-fraud measures than that

And the vendor should be asking is this card in your name, and for cardholder not present some other security information, possibly including the address.

Then, nowadays, the card company might need something extra like phone app approval using code sent by sms or face or fingerprint recognition

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094324#Comment_82094324

Assuming you meant 'card issuer/company' not 'card holder' (OP), I'm not aware of any such generic process to report "unauthorised use" in these circumstances?

It's an ambiguous phrase anyway - OP clearly did authorise the tradesman to use the card, but the payment went to a payee that OP wasn't expecting…

HillStreetBlues

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094337#Comment_82094337

The OP didn't authorise payment to supplier, as that's what happened the card use must be in definition unauthorised.

fav68

I did report the matter to Action Fraud but the case was closed 'insufficient lines of enquiry. I hadn't given much detail in my report. I presumed someone would contact me to get the full story.

HillStreetBlues

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094358#Comment_82094358

Have to contracted your card provider and stated you had reported it to Action Fraud?

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094355#Comment_82094355

But there isn't a dedicated 'payment went to wrong payee' dispute process/reason as such?

As above, the only methods of disputing card payments that I'm aware of are chargeback, s75, or unauthorised/fraudulent transaction - the latter might sound like a fit here but really isn't, as it's applicable where the cardholder had no idea that it was happening, e.g. lost/stolen card, or hacking, etc:

If the unauthorised payment was made on a credit card, or from an overdrawn account, your bank can only refuse a refund if:

You, or someone acting on your behalf, authorised the payment, or

The person who used your payment card (including virtual cards) had it with your consent. 

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/fraudulent-payments

fav68

I did let the card company know I had reported the matter to Action Fraud but they must have found out the case had been closed. They took months investigating my complaint.

I wouldn't have paid for the roof repair by credit card if I had known there wasn't going to be any legal protection. I would have let the roofer run me down to the bank instead. (not a chance) I was scared they would just go away without replacing the tiles they had lifted.

MyRealNameToo

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82094327#Comment_82094327

But we are explicitly talking about the chargeback process not the whole suite of counterfraud activities

Unless things have changed, which ChatGPT claims they havent, the actual requirements from a pure regs, statute etc perspective says there is no requirements at all to take the name of the cardholder or their address for MOTO payments. If you are registered for anti money laundering regs etc then matters are slightly different but a builders merchant doesnt automatically need to register unless they are regularly taking cash payments of over £10k


Merchant banks may require you to, in most cases they offer you discounts in fees if you do use things like AVS (address checking), but clearly you are free to choose one of the providers that dont. Certainly previously Amazon was famous for not doing anything like AVS but they argued they had their own better counter fraud mechanisms and clearly their merchant bank at the time was comfortable rather than load the fees that they normally would have for someone not using them

Technically there isnt even a need to get a card issuer authorisation for payment, though you will automatically lose a chargeback. This is somewhere which has tightened up since my last project on card payments as previously it was again just a fees matter or having to have more reserves.