Chargeback rejected on a "no error-free warranty" clause: is the bank right? (sat nav map update)

yellowrose33

On 2 August 2026 I paid £80.91 by credit card for a "July 2026" map update for my Mazda's sat nav. It was promoted by Mazda UK but sold by NNG, a Hungarian company.

The update was badly out of date. It missed A35 speed limit changes made between January and March 2026, and it sent me to a "no through road" closed to vehicles by BCP Council in April 2025.

NNG refused a refund, first because refunds aren't possible after upload, then citing a clause saying maps aren't warranted to be error-free. Mazda UK says it isn't responsible. My bank rejected my chargeback claim because of the same clause. Section 75 doesn't apply because it's under £100.

My understanding is that section 31 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 stops a clause like that limiting my rights over digital content that is as described and of satisfactory quality.

Has anyone had a chargeback rejected like this and got it overturned, perhaps through the Financial Ombudsman Service? Any advice welcome.

Isthisforreal99

Say, you did get a chargeback and the retailer contests it, and it sounds like they would and the bank reverses the chargeback - then what?

Aylesbury_Duck

What were the specific terms and conditions of the update? The changes that haven't appeared on the update are probably because NNG wasn't informed of them. I would guess that its terms state something along the lines that they can't be responsible for changes they haven't been told about. One might argue that a few speed limit changes and one erroneously labelled road aren't enough of a problem to make the update of unsatisfactory quality.

You could try the ombudsman. Being a Hungarian company I don't see any other option - taking them through a Hungarian legal process isn't practical.

sheramber

If they state they are not warranted to error free then would a complaint that they contained errors be justified?

unforeseen

It all depends on how up to date the core map info is.

Here.com seem to be one of the main suppliers of map info for sat navs so NNG are reliant on them for the accuracy.

TBH buying an update marked as July 2026 on the 2nd August cannot be considered up to date. July is just the issue date, the info could well be 6 months out of date.

When i had a Tomtom it took over a year to reflect the road changes for the Mersey Gateway bridge

Okell

@yellowrose33 - Assuming your purchase is covered by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (and it may not be if the seller is Hungarian) then it's s34 (digital content to be of satisfactory quality) and s47 (liability that cannot be excluded or restricted) that you need to working from

If you have already had one chargeback rejected I'm not sure you are allowed a second go.

Have you asked your bank why they accepted the seller's exclusion? Does the bank believe your purchase was not covered by the Consumer Roghts Act?

yellowrose33

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82147581#Comment_82147581

Thank you. I've sent another message to my bank asking them just that. I'm awaiting their reply.

yellowrose33

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82147390#Comment_82147390

I suppose it depends on what they call an "error". If they advertise it as a current update, I wouldn't expect to be navigated to a road that was closed 15 months ago. They should be honest and inform the customers how old the update is. Otherwise, the product is not as described.

MyRealNameToo

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82147581#Comment_82147581

S34 basically says it must match its description, all we have from the OP so far is that it was called the July 2026 map and not any of the description that went with it. Looking at a random one on their website it claims 99% coverage so openly admits 1% isnt covered, that it includes data that wont work with all nav systems

born_again

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6684370/chargeback-rejected-on-a-no-error-free-warranty-clause-is-the-bank-right-sat-nav-map-update

Chargeback has no bearing on your consumer right, they are just card regulations. FOS will not overturn the decision.

I'm guessing it was a "Fulty" chargeback & the update is not faulty, as it worked. The fact that there are errors in the data is not covered.

Which Navigation co provides the underlying data?

TBH, most navigation updates are out of date when applied.

Example Kia (Tom Tom Software/data) July update is actually dated January.

knightstyle

It is the same with Honda, their 2025 update did not include roads and post codes built 8 years ago!