Section 75 Consumer Credit Act 1974

[funkyparott]

Hi

 

s75 of the forementioned acts makes the follow reference:-

 

") If the debtor under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement falling within section 12(b) or © has, in relation to a transaction financed by the agreement, any claim against the supplier in respect of a misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor"

 

My situation

 

I purchased a pump costing £199.99 from Aqua Magic Tropical & Marine Ltd, Trading As “The LIving Seas” on 8th July 2008 paying my Tesco Credit card. The company has since gone into liquidation (confirmed on Companies House website)

 

The payment went through 'World Pay', who are a payment processor - like Pay pal, google checkout etc)

 

The pump has failed. I don't believe a reasonable person would expect a pump costing £200 to last only 8 months.

 

Now, a few sites on the Internet say there must be a 'direct relationship' between the credit card company and retailer. Based on this it appears I can't make a s75.

 

However, I did have a thought.

Worldpay boast on their website that they are owned by The Royal Bank of Scotland. If memory serves me correct, Tesco credit card was half owned by RBS until summertime last year.

 

If this was the case, can I argue that indeed there was a direct reltionship between RBS and the retailer?

 

Cheers

 

FP

[saintly_1]

Hi

 

Sorry, I've just noticed that you haven't had a reply yet. This isn't my area of expertise............. but hopefully somebody will be along soon to advise you further/point you in the right direction.

 

Best of luck:-)

 

 

Saint

[Kraken1]

This is the same problem some folks have been stung with on ebay and amazon. A worrying new trend. I don't think the 'owned by' argument would fly as they're all separate companies.

 

is there not a manufacturers guarantee you could claim under yourself?

[rippedoffagain]

Hi

 

s75 of the forementioned acts makes the follow reference:-

 

") If the debtor under a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement falling within section 12(b) or © has, in relation to a transaction financed by the agreement, any claim against the supplier in respect of a misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor"

 

My situation

 

I purchased a pump costing £199.99 from Aqua Magic Tropical & Marine Ltd, Trading As “The LIving Seas” on 8th July 2008 paying my Tesco Credit card. The company has since gone into liquidation (confirmed on Companies House website)

 

 

 

 

The payment went through 'World Pay', who are a payment processor - like Pay pal, google checkout etc)

 

The pump has failed. I don't believe a reasonable person would expect a pump costing £200 to last only 8 months.

 

Now, a few sites on the Internet say there must be a 'direct relationship' between the credit card company and retailer. Based on this it appears I can't make a s75.

 

However, I did have a thought.

Worldpay boast on their website that they are owned by The Royal Bank of Scotland. If memory serves me correct, Tesco credit card was half owned by RBS until summertime last year.

 

If this was the case, can I argue that indeed there was a direct reltionship between RBS and the retailer?

 

Cheers

 

FP

 

Make a claim to your Credit Card company, they are equally liable.

[Kraken1]

but that is the point, they might* not be liable as a new party has been mixed in.

 

s75 applies where the card company is an agent of both the supplier and you, in some cases if you add in a fourth party they are only the agent of you and the payment company, who then deal with the supplier on your behalf. It is no longer a debtor-creditor-supplier contract, rather a debtor-creditor-payment agent-supplier contract.

 

 

*there is some debate. :/

[rippedoffagain]

As you have no input or choice regarding how the supplier supports their merchant services, IMHO the courts would view the transaction as a three party contract. The fact that the supplier or the card provider choose to include other parties in the transmission of funds, is not your concern.

 

If a Credit Card Company could dodge the act simply by including another party, then they would all do it, thus ignoring "The will of Parliament".

[Kraken1]

Not sure I agree, but as I said, there is a debate. you pays your money (however you do it) and takes your chances.

[Viscount Stair]

Worldpay and PayPal are different as far as I know.

 

Worldpay are a merchant service and going via their processing site is no different from using a card terminal supplied by any other merchant service.

 

I don't have any chapter and verse for it but I have a vague recollection that the question of whether s75 applies where a merchant is involved has been dealt with a while back in the customers' favour.

 

The fact that RBS had a stake in Tesco credit cards is a red herring as a separate company will have been involved.

 

PayPal is different (not that they are very keen to advertise this aspect) because its transactions are structured via an account. So what you buy via PayPal is not the thing itself but credit in an account (which is denominated in currency but might as well be wampum beads) with which you buy the thing.

[bustthematrix]

I don't have any chapter and verse for it but I have a vague recollection that the question of whether s75 applies where a merchant is involved has been dealt with a while back in the customers' favour.

Hi All

I know this is oh so old but if anyone has ANY case law or other useful reference(s) on this very specific point i.e. where the creditor is seeking to hide behind a merchant/payment service provider (debtor-creditor-supplier relationship) in a valid S75 claim dispute, PLEASE POST IT asap! Much needed.

Thanks.