When something is bought on a credit card, for between 100 and 30,000, the credit card company is jointly liable with the supplier should something "go wrong".
Does anyone know - if the item purchased had notionally cost (say) 99, but an extra 5 (say) was paid for postage - so total paid on credit card is
104, thus over the 100 limit - is the purchase similarly protected, or does it fail because the cost (pre-postage) was under the 100 limit?
IANAL, but I'd said it is protected. What difference does it make? You've paid for goods (the item) and a service (the delivery, to be subcontracted out to a courier, regardless your contract is with the retailer) and the total is over £100.
Cheers,
Andy
i would say yes too, the reason being if the goods were rejected for a full refund, the refund would include the delivery costs
I can't see there being a problem - I have had claims go through for as little as 20.
Thanks Daniel
I had one comensated for 11, and it was on an overseas purchase , so i dont think they are often that anal anyway. Except barclaycard which refused my claim for a lost item (when they did that) as it was under some limit, and refused insurance on two electrical items I bought (when they did that). I dont have a barclaycard any more.
ISTR there was a High Court case recently regarding the liability of CCC's on goods purchased abroad. I believe that as a result the Co's no longer have any liability. I don't know whether this applies just to purchaes where the cardholder is present or where goods are bought from abroad, i.e. imported.
Joe Lee
AIUI that is correct, however its doesnt mean they *cant* accept liability, it just means up to the cc company whether or not to accept it. Not accepting liability for net transactions done 'abroad' is a bit of a joke because you cant always tell, (or whata bouta UK company who havea US subsidiary for example?), and its also a marketing strength, thats why I gota marbles card because of their guarantee. Several cc cos did announce after that judgement that they still would accept liability. And the company that took liability for my 11 transaction (Marbles) wasnt legally liable other than they makea point of advertsiing safety against internet problems.
Then they may be liable on contractual grounds rather than statutory grounds.
IANAL
absolutely, and thats why I use them for most of my internet purchases.
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.