Jump to content


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2439 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

I use section 75 a lot.

 

Unfortunately i have found that the credit card companies deliberately make it as difficult as possible to claim. This ranges from using low quality staff with no legal skills or experience and arming them with counter policy to claiming letters are lost in post. I have found taking matters to the FOS is unreliable - and depends on who you get - and very often they make judgements counter to law.

 

I note that Section 75 is spread across CAG. I have put this tread together to try and catch as many section 75 experiences as possible, and hope we can use this to present a more united front against the credit card companies. Maybe, if we are lucky, we can even expose some of the bad practices, and help each other make quick and successful claim.

 

Many thanks

 

Ed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi red-ed

 

The path of least resistance to getting the Credit Card company to play ball under Section 75 and pay out is to have a paper trail demonstrating that the retailer doesn't want to know. I had a sisuation where the product was faulty, I sent it to the retailer, they tested it, they told me that the fault only occurred once whilst they tested it. They stated this in the e-mail they sent me. I sent all my e-mails to the Credit Card company, they didn't want to know. I then wrote a letter of complaint to the CEO of the credit card company with the key COBS principles. A couple of weeks later the Credit Card company credited my account.

 

Credit Card companies will stonewall, in fact they are not big on responsibility or principles, just look at PPI, credit card charges, crazy limits, etc.

 

You have to be relentless in your pursuit of consumer justice. The Credit Card company know that some people will not have the stamina to purse their claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you rebel11,

 

Your story is exactly why i started a discussion on this theme. They try to be as awkward as possible to put you off and send you back to the trader - and i have found they are not always honest and play all sorts of games.

 

I recently contacted Which on the subject - and they advised to claim from the trader and the CC at the same time - and yes be relentless.

 

Ed

Link to post
Share on other sites

COBS - http://fshandbook.info/FS/html/Handbook/COBS

 

6 - Customers' interests - A firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly.

 

7 - Communications with clients – A firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hi red-ed

 

The FOS talk about taking into consideration decisions based on current laws and regulations, so they should know about them. They are there to be used in court.

 

Hello Rebel11,

 

Do you think the FOS know about these - i note that it is unlawful if they are ignored. I do wonder if anyone has ever relied on these principles in court ?

 

Ed

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...