Credit Card Protection on 5K Purchase?

"Joe Lee" wrote


Why do you need to give the seller 30 days to provide the refund, *before* you can approach the CC provider? Isn't the CC provider *JOINTLY* liable with the seller? [That would give you equal right to go to either first...]
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Quite possibly from a letter of the law point of view, but you`ll probably find yourself jumping through even more hoops than usual with your CC issuer doing it this way round.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Because Sec.14(3) of the Consumer Protection - Distance Selling Regulations provide for the seller up to 30 days in which to make the reimbursement to the buyer, from the day on which the buyer gave notice of cancellation of the Contract.

The question of liability only arises when the seller fails to conform to the Contract & the legislation governing it. The CC provider therefore only becomes jointly liable under Sec. 75 of CCA (subject to it being a qualifying Contract) only when the seller has failed in performance of the Contract eg. as here, failed to comply with S14(3) of the DSR's.
You could approach the CC provider prior to that, but no legal liability would exist under which they would be required to provide a S.75 chargeback at that point. An exception would be where the seller had ceased trading / entered into receivership, at which point they may well accept liability subject to a formal claim being submitted.
--
Joe Lee



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"Joe Lee" wrote

Those are irrelevant here, she's claiming under SoGA.
"Joe Lee" wrote

That's just an extra right under DSR - it doesn't invalidate the other right under Joint Liability, does it?

"Joe Lee" wrote

The seller *has* failed to conform, in the example considered, under SoGA.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh dear. You have overlooked two things here. Firstly I gave the answer to the question which you posed & seconly, we were discussing the siuation the OP was in prior to receiving the goods (& where the DSR's applied) - so the response was relevant on both counts.

See the above & my previous response to the OP!
--
Joe Lee



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"Joe Lee" wrote

No you didn't! [I didn't ask why the seller has 30 days to pay...] The seller having 30 days to pay is not inconsistent with the buyer being able to immediately ask the CC provider for a chargeback; if there was true "joint liability" then the buyer could ask *either* the seller *or* the CC provider to make the refund, and whoever they chose would then have 30 days to pay.
"Joe Lee" wrote

*All* of the DSR, SoGA & CCA apply, don't they? Just because the DSR apply as well, doesn't stop the SoGA & CCA applying **at the same time**.
CCA S75 gives joint liability to the CC provider...
"Joe Lee" wrote

Only if you can show that "joint liability" is put on hold for those 30 days. Is it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This is becoming extremely boring as you have already asked the very same question! My response was <quote. The question of liability only arises when the seller fails to conform to the Contract & the legislation governing it. The CC provider therefore only becomes jointly liable under Sec. 75 of CCA (subject to it being a qualifying Contract) only when the seller has failed in performance of the Contract eg. as here, failed to comply with S14(3) of the DSR's.
You could approach the CC provider prior to that, but no legal liability would exist under which they would be required to provide a S.75 chargeback at that point. An exception would be where the seller had ceased trading / entered into receivership, at which point they may well accept liability subject to a formal claim being submitted.
</quote>
I hope that helps, but if my suspicion is correct in that you are simply incapable of understanding it, can I suggest you re-phrase your question in the (probably forlorn) hope that another contributor will assist you.
--
Joe Lee



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"Joe Lee" wrote

OK, let's try again; I'll try to make it easy for you to understand! ...
As you state, "The question of liability only arises when the seller fails to conform to the Contract & the legislation governing it." This can happen in any number of ways, eg it might be a failure under DSR or a failure under SoGA etc. We're assuming that there *is* a failure under the SoGA (eg failure to provide goods, or providing defective goods) -- that is all that the OP is worried about.
Now, we have a failure under SoGA *already* (so no need to wait 30 days to discover if there will be a failure under DSR). Why do you think that the joint liability provisions don't kick-in immediately, bearing in mind there is already a failure to conform ... ?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did you pay by paypal or direct through visa? If its the former, then kiss it all goodbye.
Gaz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

BeanSmart.com is a site by and for consumers of financial services and advice. We are not affiliated with any of the banks, financial services or software manufacturers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.

Tax and financial advice you come across on this site is freely given by your peers and professionals on their own time and out of the kindness of their hearts. We can guarantee neither accuracy of such advice nor its applicability for your situation. Simply put, you are fully responsible for the results of using information from this site in real life situations.