Send a clear written chaser to the card provider today asking for a decision date and confirming the remedy being sought under Section 75. If nothing is done, the delay usually drifts into repeated holding replies and the purchase problem stays unresolved. Keep the request narrow, attach the key evidence, and ask for the complaint to be treated as urgent if there is a deadline such as travel dates or a trader insolvency. If the provider still does not decide, escalate through the provider’s formal complaints route and then to the relevant ombudsman process once the complaint stage allows it.
What the problem is
A Section 75 claim can stall after the card provider has acknowledged it but does not issue a clear accept/decline decision. This tends to show up in the UK when a purchase has gone wrong with a retailer or travel company and the consumer turns to the credit provider for a refund or compensation, especially where the trader is slow, has stopped responding, or has become insolvent. The delay often appears after an initial complaint has been logged and the provider has asked for documents, then goes quiet or keeps saying the case is “with the team”.
It commonly affects people who paid by credit card for higher-value items, services, or travel arrangements and are trying to avoid being bounced between the trader and the finance side. The sticking point is usually not whether the claim was received, but that the provider will not commit to a timescale, will not confirm what evidence is still needed, or will not explain what is being investigated. Many cases reach this stage after a partial response from the provider, such as a request for more information, followed by weeks of no meaningful progress.
Why this happens
Delays tend to happen when the provider treats the claim as a complex dispute rather than a straightforward liability decision, so it gets routed through multiple teams. Another common cause is that the provider is waiting for information from the trader or a payment processor, even though the consumer has already supplied the core documents. Some claims also slow down because the provider is mixing up Section 75 with chargeback handling, which can lead to repeated “we’re still investigating” messages without a clear decision point.
From a business perspective, a slow process reduces immediate payouts and encourages some customers to accept a smaller goodwill offer or give up. It also gives the provider time to test whether the customer can be redirected back to the retailer, even where the retailer is not engaging. A typical organisational response pattern is that the provider sends periodic holding updates that repeat the same wording and do not answer the specific questions asked.
Your rights in practice
In UK cases, the most effective leverage is to treat the delay as a complaint about service and decision-making, not just a request for an update. A provider does not have to agree with the claim, but it is expected to handle it fairly, explain what it needs, and give a clear outcome within a reasonable timeframe. Clear, written requests that pin down what is outstanding and ask for a decision date tend to produce better movement than phone calls that end with “someone will call you back”.
It also helps to separate two points: the underlying dispute (what went wrong with the purchase) and the provider’s handling (delay, lack of clarity, inconsistent messages). When the provider is pressed to confirm whether it is making a Section 75 decision or running a different process, the file often gets reassigned to a complaints handler who can issue a final response. Practical leverage usually comes from showing that the evidence is already complete, that the remedy is specific (refund, repair cost, cancellation), and that the provider is now failing on complaint handling rather than simply “investigating”.
Legal or official basis
The official route that usually unlocks progress is the Financial Ombudsman Service process, which can review how the provider handled the complaint and whether the outcome was fair. In practice, the ombudsman route depends on the provider being given the chance to issue a final response first, or the complaint reaching the point where it can be taken further because the provider has not resolved it in time. The key is having a clear paper trail showing the claim, the evidence supplied, the chasers, and the lack of a decision or a reasoned explanation.
Use the Financial Ombudsman Service complaints information on GOV.UK guidance to check the steps and what to send, then keep the escalation focused on delay and lack of decision as well as the underlying purchase problem.
Evidence that matters
Evidence is less about volume and more about showing a clean timeline: what was bought, what went wrong, what was promised, and what remedy is being asked for. Providers often delay when they cannot see the contract terms, the proof of payment, or the trader’s refusal or failure to fix the issue. If the trader has stopped responding, screenshots of unanswered emails and any insolvency notice can be enough to show the practical dead end.
Keep documents in a single folder and label them by date so it is easy to show what the provider already has. Where the dispute is about quality or misdescription, photos and an independent report can help, but only if they directly relate to the fault being claimed. If the dispute is about cancellation or non-delivery, the strongest items are the order confirmation, delivery promises, and proof nothing arrived or the service was not provided.
Key documents
Collect the items below before chasing again, so the provider cannot reset the clock by asking for basics.
- Card statement line showing the transaction and date
- Order confirmation or contract terms (including cancellation terms if relevant)
- Evidence of the problem (photos, emails, tracking, service cancellation notice)
- Trader correspondence showing refusal, delay, or no response
Common mistakes
These errors often cause avoidable delay or weaken the complaint handling argument.
- Sending large, unstructured email chains without a summary of what is being claimed
- Changing the remedy being requested mid-way, which triggers re-triage
- Relying on phone calls only and not confirming the request and evidence in writing
Do not do yet
Do not accept a partial goodwill credit as “full and final” until the provider confirms in writing what happens to the Section 75 claim and whether the remaining loss is still being considered.
Steps to take next
Send a chaser
Write to the provider’s complaints address (email or secure message) and ask for three things: confirmation the matter is being handled as a Section 75 claim, a list of any missing evidence, and a decision date. Attach the core documents again if the file has been passed between teams, and keep the message short so it is hard to ignore. If there is a practical deadline, state it plainly and explain the consequence, such as replacement costs rising or travel dates approaching.
Use official process
If the provider has an online complaints form or secure message route, use that official channel rather than sending documents to random inboxes or social media accounts. The official route is usually found by searching the provider’s site for “complaints” and then selecting the option for credit card disputes or Section 75, and it will tell the accepted file types and size limits. Prepare the information the form normally asks for: transaction date, amount, merchant name, what went wrong, what remedy is sought, and what evidence is attached.
- Transaction details and card account reference
- One-paragraph timeline of events
- Exact remedy requested (refund amount and any linked losses being claimed)
- Copies of the key documents already provided
The normal response timeframe for a formal complaint is that the provider should send a substantive response within weeks rather than months, and a final response is typically issued within eight weeks of the complaint being logged. If there is no meaningful response, escalate by replying to the complaint reference and stating that the complaint is now about delay and lack of decision, and that the next step will be ombudsman escalation once the complaint stage allows it. In many UK cases, the issue is resolved when a complaints handler reviews the file and either makes a decision or offers a settlement with clear terms.
Choose payment route
If the provider keeps treating the case as a chargeback-only dispute, it can help to be explicit about the route being pursued and why. Where the purchase was on credit card and meets the usual criteria, a Section 75 decision is often more direct than waiting for merchant responses through card scheme processes; for a practical comparison at the point of escalation, see Chargeback vs Section 75 and use that distinction to frame the complaint. Keep the request focused on a decision, not a debate about internal workflows.
Escalate at right time
If the provider issues a final response that is unclear, incomplete, or still avoids a decision, keep the letter and any attachments exactly as received. If eight weeks pass from the complaint being logged without a final response, keep proof of the complaint start date and the chasers. At that point, escalation is normally done by submitting the complaint to the ombudsman route with the timeline and documents, highlighting the delay and the lack of a reasoned decision.
Related issues nearby
If the provider refuses the claim or offers a partial refund that does not match the loss, it may help to compare the provider’s reasoning with the usual Section 75 approach, and Section 75 claim explained can be useful when deciding whether to challenge the decision or narrow the remedy requested. If an alternative dispute resolution outcome exists with the trader and the business ignores it, that becomes a different escalation problem and may need a separate approach. These related issues tend to matter once there is a written decision or a settlement offer, rather than during the initial delay stage.
FAQ quick answers
Chasing wording
For Section 75 claim chasing wording, ask for confirmation of the route, what evidence is missing, and a decision date in the same message.
Partial refund offers
With Section 75 partial refund offers, reply in writing stating whether it is accepted only as an interim payment and what amount remains in dispute.
Eight week point
The Section 75 eight week point is when a complaint can usually be taken further if there is no final response, so keep proof of the complaint start date.
Phone call records
For Section 75 phone call records, note the date, time, agent name, and what was promised, then confirm it by email or secure message.
Before you move on
Before sending the next chaser, check the remedy being requested is consistent across messages and that the evidence pack shows a clean timeline from purchase to trader failure to provider delay. Time pressure can creep in when a provider hints that an offer is only available for a short window.
Get help with the next step
Contact UKFixGuide — Share the dates of your Section 75 claim, the complaint reference, and the last written response so the next escalation message can be drafted around the delay.
