So nothing further to add then........ Moving on

How ridiculous. In your first post to this thread you told the OP that "you only have the s75 option left through BC". I can't see where you explained exactly how the OP could pursue a S75 claim?

There's nothing wrong with just pointing the OP in the right direction anyway. I'd argue that it's better to help people to help themselves.

In any case, it's far better than giving out incorrect information

While we wait for BE96 to come back with answers to the Q's in post #5 above, I can make the following comments :-

1. There is not going to be s.75 protection if the £3,000 disputed payment related to a single contract for over £30K.

2. Although it is not relevant in BE96's case which is for over £30K, the issue of Paypal's involvement in a transaction does not necessarily deny you s.75 protection. The issue is discussed by Which? in an article here - http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/section-75-of-the-consumer-credit-act#payments-through-paypal

How ridiculous. In your first post to this thread you told the OP that "you only have the s75 option left through BC". I can't see where you explained exactly how the OP could pursue a S75 claim?

 

There's nothing wrong with just pointing the OP in the right direction anyway. I'd argue that it's better to help people to help themselves.

 

In any case, it's far better than giving out incorrect information

A s75 was his only option via BC, if you read the post correctly tho it is not his only option, he also has the option of court action, prior to which, the OP would need to satisfy himself that even if he were successfull, he must make sure he can enforce a ccj, hence the question of whether the builder owns any property.

I will not be responding to any more of your comments as none of them help the OP and serve only to hijack the thread.

Whilst the payment may have been to Paypal, it was not a standard Paypal payment.

The OP did not actually link his Credit Card to a Paypal account and then make a payment that way, he made a payment via a Chip and Pin terminal that just happened to be provided by Paypal.

My understanding would be that this latter method used by the OP would indeed be covered by S75 as it is not a standard Paypal transaction, but a standard Chip and Pin transaction, the same as with any retailer.

Contractual value is still over 30k so s75 does not apply

I am aware the local authority building control cannot be held liable in a court of law, but does anyone know if this is true of approved inspectors, who work privately for themselves?

See the link below, i think the same would apply to contracted inspectors aswell

http://www.footanstey.com/updates-a-publications/1079-can-you-sue-building-control-if-they-fail-to-spot-defective-work

thanks for that, but the difference between the subject of the article and my circumstances are that I have a contract with the approved inspector...

Have a good read of what the contract says, it will say so if you cannot hold them liable.

Does anyone know much about approved inspectors for building control?

Does anyone know what the legislation states that they must physically inspect when building work is going on?

I have an approved inspector and he does not appear to be doing a lot of inspecting! Just asks the builder for a lot of photos!

I have an approved inspector and he does not appear to be doing a lot of inspecting! Just asks the builder for a lot of photos!

A neighbour self built an extension recently, and Building Control only made a couple of visits during the early phases. Basically checked the foundations and first pour of concrete, and after that seemed to rely on a steady stream of photographs as the build progressed.

If you have doubts about the quality of your build, you could ask the BCO to pay a site visit. This however, could incur additional charges, but would be a small price to pay if he uncovers any problems. That said, Building Control are primarily interested in whether the construction meets the approved standards and not the quality of the workmanship.

thanks for the above, but I just wonder if approved inspectors have a legal duty to actually physically check certain parts of the build, or can they get away with simply having photos sent to them!

Hopefully, some of the regulars will be able to answer the question of legal duty. I can only comment based on very limited experience.

Just a couple of questions!

Do you have any s75 CCA rights if the bank have refunded a deposit via chargeback?

I paid a builder for some work and as he did not complete the work and refused to return my money,

I clawed back some of my money via chargeback

- unfortunately this was also for a deposit I paid.

Given that the bank have given back my money on the deposit,

do they still have liability under s75?

I really hope they do as I need the protection!

also

My bank is asking me for all sorts of information that doesn't appear of any use to them.

They are either trying to find a way to wriggle out of paying out, or they are delaying things.

They are asking for my builder's (who I am making a claim against) insurance policy,

as I previously tried to claim on that,

but failed as the builder did not have the right cover.

Why would the bank want this information.

How does it prove they are liable under s75?

thanks!

I do not understand what you mean?

IMO Chargeback is the simplified way of making a s75 claim.

If the Bank paid your claim in full I would say they have fulfilled their s75 obligations for that qualifying transaction.

They will attempt to recover their loss from builders Insurers.

sadly this op seems to start a new thread every so often about the same issue but in another round about way

this is the 10th

now merged with the already existing merged threads.

dx