If a UK credit card purchase (or linked finance) goes wrong and the supplier won’t put it right, a Section 75 claim usually makes the card provider equally responsible and the next step is a written complaint demanding a refund or repair within a set deadline.
What’s happening
Section 75 problems usually start the same way: something is bought on a credit card, the goods or service are faulty, not delivered, misrepresented, or the company disappears, and the seller’s “customer service loop” goes nowhere. In UK cases this often happens with big-ticket items (sofas, kitchens, electronics), travel and events (flights, hotels, weddings), and online purchases from companies that look UK-based but are hard to pin down when things go wrong.
A common pattern is being offered a partial refund, store credit, or a “repair” that doesn’t actually fix the issue, while the seller delays until the chargeback window is nearly gone. Another common pattern is the seller saying “take it up with the manufacturer” or “it’s outside our policy”, even though the legal responsibility sits with the supplier and, in certain situations, the credit provider too.
Section 75 is often confused with chargeback. Chargeback is a card scheme process (not a law) and can be useful, but it is not the same as Section 75. Section 75 is a legal route that can apply even when a chargeback fails or is out of time, as long as the legal conditions are met.
People also get tripped up by how the payment was made. Section 75 is usually strongest when a credit card is used directly to pay the supplier. Things get more complicated when payment goes through a third party (some payment processors, wallets, or marketplace arrangements), when only a small deposit is paid on the credit card, or when the purchase is split across cards. Those details decide whether the “debtor–creditor–supplier” link is intact, which is what lenders tend to argue about.
What the law says (UK)
Under Consumer Credit Act 1974, section 75 – creditor liability for misrepresentation or breach of contract, the credit provider can be jointly and severally liable with the supplier for a breach of contract or misrepresentation on qualifying purchases where the cash price is over £100 and not more than £30,000, meaning the card provider can be pursued for a refund, repair costs, or other direct losses if the supplier will not resolve it; if the lender refuses, the usual escalation is a formal complaint to the lender and then the Financial Ombudsman Service after the lender’s final response or after eight weeks. Source: Citizens Advice.
Steps to fix
Check the basics
Start by confirming the key eligibility points that lenders focus on:
- Payment method: it must be credit (not debit), and the credit agreement must be linked to the purchase.
- Cash price: the item or service must be priced over £100 and up to £30,000 (not the amount charged to the card if only a deposit was paid).
- What went wrong: there must be a breach of contract (for example, not delivered, faulty, not as described) or misrepresentation (for example, false claims that induced the purchase).
If the purchase was made through a third-party payment route, note it down now. Many refusals hinge on whether the supplier was paid directly by the credit provider or whether an intermediary breaks the chain. That does not always end the claim, but it changes how the complaint should be framed and what evidence matters.
Collect clean evidence
Section 75 outcomes are usually decided on paperwork. Gather:
- Order confirmation, invoice, and terms and conditions (screenshots if online).
- Proof of payment (card statement showing the transaction and merchant name).
- Delivery records, tracking, or cancellation confirmation.
- Photos/videos of faults, engineer reports, or independent quotes if relevant.
- All emails, chat logs, and notes of calls (dates, names, what was said).
Where the issue is “not as described”, keep the original advert, product page, or sales email. If the seller has edited the listing, screenshots with dates help. Where the issue is a service (travel, building work, events), keep the schedule, what was promised, and what was actually provided.
Ask the supplier once
Send the supplier a short written request to fix the problem (refund, replacement, repair, or completion). Give a clear deadline (usually 14 days) and keep it factual. This is not always legally required for Section 75, but in typical UK cases it helps show the lender that the supplier was given a reasonable chance and refused or failed.
If the supplier offers a partial refund or store credit, reply in writing and state whether it is accepted as a full and final settlement. If it is not, say so clearly. Many disputes get messy because a “goodwill” payment is later treated as settlement.
Write the Section 75 claim
Contact the card provider’s disputes/claims team and state clearly that this is a Section 75 claim for breach of contract and/or misrepresentation. Include:
- The transaction date, amount, and merchant name as it appears on the statement.
- The cash price of the goods/service and what was paid on the card.
- A short timeline of what happened and what remedy is being requested.
- Copies of the key evidence (not originals).
Be specific about the remedy. If the goods are faulty, say whether a refund is being sought or the cost of repair/replacement. If the supplier has gone bust, say that the supplier cannot provide the remedy and the lender is being asked to step in. If there are additional direct losses (for example, paying someone else to fix defective work), keep them reasonable and evidenced; lenders often push back on indirect or consequential losses.
Keep the claim tight
Section 75 decisions often turn on clarity. Avoid long narratives and stick to the contract point: what was promised, what was delivered, and how that is a breach or misrepresentation. If the supplier’s terms try to limit refunds, include them anyway; unfair terms arguments can be complex, but the lender still has to address the core breach.
If only a deposit was paid on the credit card, state the full cash price and attach the invoice showing it. In many UK cases, paying even a small amount on credit can still bring the whole purchase within Section 75, but lenders sometimes misunderstand this and treat it as a claim only for the deposit unless it is spelled out.
Use the complaint route
If the lender delays, rejects without addressing the evidence, or treats it as chargeback only, raise a formal complaint to the lender. Ask for a written final response. Keep a record of dates. If the lender has not resolved it after eight weeks, or it issues a final response that is not acceptable, the next step is the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Check related housing issues
Section 75 disputes sometimes sit alongside bigger problems, especially when the purchase relates to a tenancy (for example, paying for furniture, white goods, or services during a move). If the dispute is happening at the same time as landlord pressure or eviction paperwork, keep the issues separate and deal with the housing process on its own timetable. If a notice has been served, see Section 21 notice — is it valid? so deadlines are not missed while the payment dispute is being argued.
What NOT to do
- Do not rely on phone calls only. UK lenders and suppliers often “lose” verbal promises; keep everything in writing or follow up calls with an email summary.
- Do not accept store credit by accident. If vouchers are accepted, it can be treated as settlement and make a later cash refund harder.
- Do not return goods without proof. If returning, use tracked delivery and keep photos of packaging and condition; disputes often turn into “item not received” arguments.
- Do not miss the complaint clock. Waiting months while the supplier drags it out can weaken the practical position, even if Section 75 is still available.
- Do not exaggerate losses. Inflated claims tend to trigger blanket refusals; keep it to the contract and evidenced costs.
- Do not confuse chargeback with Section 75. If the lender only discusses chargeback, restate that a legal Section 75 claim is being made and ask for a complaint reference if it refuses.
- Do not stop paying the card without advice. Withholding payments can lead to fees and credit file damage while the dispute is ongoing.
What happens if it’s ignored
If nothing is done, the most common outcome is that the supplier keeps control of the timeline and the buyer ends up stuck with a faulty item, an unfinished service, or no delivery and no refund. Evidence also degrades: listings disappear, emails get deleted, and staff change. Where the supplier becomes insolvent, it can become harder to get documents or admissions that support the claim.
On the lender side, delay tends to create a second problem: the lender may treat the issue as “too old” for its internal processes, or it may default to chargeback rules and say the window has passed. Even when Section 75 is still arguable, a late, messy claim often leads to long complaint handling times and repeated requests for the same documents.
Ignoring the dispute can also affect credit and budgeting. If the card balance remains unpaid because the purchase is being disputed informally, interest and fees can build. If payments are missed, a credit file marker can be added even while the underlying purchase is being argued, which is a common and avoidable knock-on effect.
When to escalate
Escalate after refusal
If the lender rejects the claim without addressing Section 75, or it says “contact the retailer” despite clear evidence of breach/misrepresentation, escalate immediately through the lender’s formal complaints process. Ask for the decision in writing and request the complaint reference number.
Escalate after eight weeks
If the lender has not resolved the complaint within eight weeks, or it issues a final response that is not acceptable, escalate to the Financial Ombudsman Service with the full evidence bundle and the complaint timeline. The Ombudsman route is slow in many UK cases, but it is the standard escalation path and lenders tend to take it more seriously once a case is opened.
Escalate for urgent losses
If the problem is time-sensitive (for example, travel dates, accommodation, essential household goods, or a service needed to make a home safe), state the urgency in writing and ask the lender to treat it as urgent hardship. Provide proof of the deadline and the impact (for example, alternative quotes, temporary accommodation costs, or safety reports). Lenders are more likely to act quickly when the request is specific and evidenced.
Escalate if the supplier collapses
If the supplier has gone into administration or liquidation, include proof (for example, the company notice, bounced emails, or public announcements) and make clear that the supplier cannot provide the remedy. In UK cases, this is one of the strongest practical triggers for a lender to engage, because the “go back to the retailer” route is no longer realistic.
FAQ
Does paying a deposit on credit…
Often yes, if the cash price is over £100 and the credit card payment forms part of the purchase, but lenders may argue about the payment chain, so the invoice showing the full cash price matters.
Is Section 75 the same as…
No. Chargeback is a card scheme process with time limits and rules; Section 75 is a legal claim against the credit provider for breach of contract or misrepresentation.
What if the item cost £99?
Section 75 usually does not apply if the cash price is £100 or less, even if extra fees push the card transaction over £100; other routes like chargeback may still be available.
What if the purchase was over…
Section 75 usually does not apply above £30,000, though some lenders may offer goodwill routes; other legal options may exist depending on the contract.
Can a debit card claim use…
No, Section 75 is tied to credit agreements; debit card disputes are usually handled through chargeback or the bank’s own dispute process.
What if the seller offers a…
If a repair is reasonable and actually fixes the fault, it may resolve the breach; if repeated repairs fail or the repair is not adequate, the claim can be reframed around failure to provide goods of satisfactory quality or the promised service.
How long does a lender take?
Times vary, but a formal complaint has a typical eight-week window before it can be taken to the Ombudsman if unresolved.
Before you move on
Save the advert/contract, the card statement line, and one clear email asking for the exact remedy by a deadline, because if you felt pushed to act quickly or told there was no time, that’s often a sign the process wasn’t handled properly.
Get help with the next step
If the lender is delaying, refusing Section 75, or treating it as chargeback only, use the UKFixGuide contact page to outline what happened and what paperwork is available so the next message is structured and escalation-ready.
6 thoughts on “Section 75 claim explained”