Jump to content
 

Crowdfunding: Reclaim via Credit Card


Damo666
 Share

Recommended Posts

Interesting, but not surprised that they try to brush you off.  I think sticking to the claim that you were paying for a complete model is key.  The slight concern I have is that in some comments from DJM, I got the opinion that the staged payments paid for stages.   Perhaps keeping this description from correspondence with the CC company is wise

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Remember that the last thing any company really wants to do is give you any money so the initial claim stages will always be awkward in the hope that all bar the most persevering will give up and walk away. 

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ouroborus said:

Interesting, but not surprised that they try to brush you off.  I think sticking to the claim that you were paying for a complete model is key.  The slight concern I have is that in some comments from DJM, I got the opinion that the staged payments paid for stages.   Perhaps keeping this description from correspondence with the CC company is wise

While technically correct, the deposit was for the product as a whole. And that is what is in question. So the 'stageness' is no more relevant that paying in instalments. No?

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Damo666 said:

Thought it best to start a separate thread on experiences of reclaiming (if it’s possible) against any deposits paid. This thread is specifically relating to reclaiming against a credit card. Perhaps someone would start a PayPal thread (or other payment methods) if necessary and keep this one for CC.

 

I paid my deposit for the DJM Class 92 via my Lloyds AMEX credit card in Feb 2017.

I rang my credit card company this afternoon to claim a refund of the £30 deposit. Reason I started a reclaim is based on today’s notification at Companies House of a new registered address for DJM for a business being a ‘licensed insolvency practitioner and business recovery specialists’. *

 

(*In case anyone says I’m jumping the gun, in the UK Building Contracts I use (JCT Form of Contract), if a contractor has commenced discussion on insolvency, “appoints an administrator receiver, receiver or manager of his property, has passed a resolution for voluntary winding-up without declaration of solvency,,…. otherwise entering administration within the meaning of Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986, …. entering into an arrangement, compromise, composition in satisfaction of his debts (unless reconstruction)…..” whether it is concluded or not, the contract is terminated as the person is deemed insolvent within the terms of the building contract. This may not be applicable in cases outside the building industry, but it justifies my approach to the bank to seek a refund of my DJM deposit).

 

Initial response from the bank was that I was outside a 120 day claim period and I should contact Citizen’s Advice.

 

I stated that (1) I was not aware that there was a time limitation on making a claim and (2) I was only aware today that the supplier was in contact with a liquidator, so under the Limitations Act the commencement of any limitation begins today.

 

CC company’s response was, because I only paid £30, it wasn't covered under Section 75.

I pointed out that this too isn’t correct, that I am covered under Section 75 for any amount paid as long as the total amount to be paid for the goods is over £100. It's the total value of the product that is key, not how much I have paid. (up to max £30K I think, but not relevant here).

 

CC company then acknowledged that I am correct, I would be covered under Section 75, and have therefore sent my claim to their claim’s department. I will get a response in 7 – 10 days.

 

I was surprised and disappointed that the CC company’s first two attempts were to rebuff me, as this should be basic knowledge for the CC company. So please be aware that the CC company may try to avoid any claims.

 

Will keep you posted on progress.

Having once worked on Section 75 claims (about 30 years ago) I can confirm that apart from travel liquidations that is the standard response the bank will give and try and brush you off, you need to persist.

 

At the end of the day the payment you receive will be an ex gratia payment from the bank admitting no liability, it is unlikely the bank will recover a penny from DJ Models so effectively the bank is bailing you out.

 

The CAB will be able to help if it gets difficult, you may need to be prepared to go to small claims if they are especially resistant, again the CAB will advise the best course.

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, truffy said:

While technically correct, the deposit was for the product as a whole. And that is what is in question. So the 'stageness' is no more relevant that paying in instalments. No?

 

I honestly don't know Truffy.  The whole thing seems a mess.  When he was doing his refunds over the PayPal debacle, some got refunds, some didn't on what seemed an arbitrary basis, DJM saying the money had been spent.   I'm also a little mindful of some of the statements he made here and elsewhere that your money may be at risk.  But, of course the flip side for the consumer may be to argue that the t&c were so bloody confusing that they were impossible to understand and without this certainty, they handed their money over in good faith a la other crowd funding models or pre-payment model.  I'm guessing people may get wildly different responses from their CC companies anyway and if any of the CC companies choose to take a closer look at what was for sale, it just gets murkier.  What a mess. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Id say get your claims in early, the amounts being quite low and spread across many card companies you might find they pay out if you're persistent as it's not worth them spending too much time defending the claims.

 

Banks are relatively pragmatic, no point spending more than the claim trying to defend it.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ouroborus said:

Interesting, but not surprised that they try to brush you off.  I think sticking to the claim that you were paying for a complete model is key.  The slight concern I have is that in some comments from DJM, I got the opinion that the staged payments paid for stages.   Perhaps keeping this description from correspondence with the CC company is wise

 

The invoice I have from DJModels Ltd, which notes 'PAID' in the top right corner, states the following:

 

  "DJM 00 Gauge Class 92 Project (DEPOSIT) Quantity 1, Price £30"

 

  "Please note this is a deposit sum, and not the total, which is payable as the project progresses."

 

My clear interpretation of this, and the case I will be arguing with the CC company should it be raised by them, is that this is a Deposit, and NOT a full payment towards a particular stage.

 

2 hours ago, truffy said:

While technically correct, the deposit was for the product as a whole. And that is what is in question. So the 'stageness' is no more relevant that paying in instalments. No?

 

I agree.

Edited by Damo666
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the invoice does not make clear that the total purchase price exceeded the GBP100 threshold for a credit card claim then I suggest you grab a screenshot of the product page from the DJM website whilst it's still active. If you are claiming from your credit card company or bank then you are relying on your contract with them, and DJM's T&Cs should have no bearing upon it. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dpgibbons said:

If the invoice does not make clear that the total purchase price exceeded the GBP100 threshold for a credit card claim then I suggest you grab a screenshot of the product page from the DJM website whilst it's still active. If you are claiming from your credit card company or bank then you are relying on your contract with them, and DJM's T&Cs should have no bearing upon it.

 

Done exactly that yesterday, along with putting all the newsletters in a file for easy reference, so that I can show the CC company why there has been a delay between paying the deposit and today. I may not have all the updates, so will have to do some digging around in case its needed. (It would be nice to be prepared, even if I don't eventually need to use it.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I have had the phonecall with Paypal.

No luck as it's outside the 180 day dispute period. They told me to pursue it directly with DJM or whoever will be in charge.

I paid it to Paypal as a direct transfer from my bank account so difficult to chase the bank for it.

 

Maybe Paypal were playing hardball or not, I don't know.

At the end of the day, I'll be spending more of my time chasing it, than it's worth doing so.

 

Unless anything firm pops up on tonight's DJM announcement, I'll probably say goodbye to it.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

  • Friendly/supportive 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, newbryford said:

I have had the phonecall with Paypal.

No luck as it's outside the 180 day dispute period. They told me to pursue it directly with DJM or whoever will be in charge.

I paid it to Paypal as a direct transfer from my bank account so difficult to chase the bank for it.

 

Maybe Paypal were playing hardball or not, I don't know.

At the end of the day, I'll be spending more of my time chasing it, than it's worth doing so.

 

Unless anything firm pops up on tonight's DJM announcement, I'll probably say goodbye to it.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

Thanks for sharing this Mick - I wonder if PayPal will also not entertain the credit card charge back route for PayPal payments made by credit card? I will ask when I get a chance to call and post the response here. 

Cheers, Phil. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried a PayPal 180 day refund before and PayPal told me it was just a gimmick and they rarely payout.... 

 

However - PayPal payments are (or definitely used to be) classed as a direct debit by the bank and I have claimed back a PayPal payment under the Direct Debit guarantee. May be worth persuing. 

 

I paid deposits for 2 so hoping my credit card co. dont give me too much grief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I had, in my mind, written off my payment but I've done some digging and thankfully I paid the deposit via credit card direct and not via paypal. Claim raised today, thank you to those who have outlined the process as it is not clear from the credit card website how claims can be raised (and I used to work for a bank at one time!).

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 04/06/2019 at 17:59, Damo666 said:

Thought it best to start a separate thread on experiences of reclaiming (if it’s possible) against any deposits paid. This thread is specifically relating to reclaiming against a credit card. Perhaps someone would start a PayPal thread (or other payment methods) if necessary and keep this one for CC.

 

I paid my deposit for the DJM Class 92 via my Lloyds AMEX credit card in Feb 2017.

 

intermediate deleted to save Space - lochhlongside

 

I was surprised and disappointed that the CC company’s first two attempts were to rebuff me, as this should be basic knowledge for the CC company. So please be aware that the CC company may try to avoid any claims.

 

Will keep you posted on progress.

Hi Damo666

Thank you for that - it really was most informative. Much appreciated as I had mentally written off the deposit but now.....

 

Can you just clarify/confirm before I go down what is hopefully the same route - I and probably several others  who paid Cl92 deposits at the same time as you (Jan/Feb 2017) will have paid by credit card but at that time DJ Models only had a Paypal account - and many of us I guess would have received a  receipt that came via Paypal stating along the lines of the following  .....

You sent a payment of £60.00 GBP to DJModels Ltd.....

Dear xxxxxxxx,

This charge will appear on your statement as payment to PAYPAL *DJMODELSLTD.

etc etc

 

To my (rather simplistic!!)  mind this is a payment to DJM not to Paypal - they were just acting as his bank account holder (and at that time there was no other way of paying anyway) - however were you also in this position or had you formalised (possibly at a later date?) the original transaction with DJM such that you had a separate direct transaction with DJM without Paypal as his account holder? 

I too am anticipating possible pushback from my credit card company (also owned by Lloyds)  and just want to get my case prepared in advance.!!

(Incidentally I now note some other quite wellknown online model suppliers also use this paypal facility - although they haven't done a DJM.... to date).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, lochlongside said:

Hi Damo666

Thank you for that - it really was most informative. Much appreciated as I had mentally written off the deposit but now.....

 

Can you just clarify/confirm before I go down what is hopefully the same route - I and probably several others  who paid Cl92 deposits at the same time as you (Jan/Feb 2017) will have paid by credit card but at that time DJ Models only had a Paypal account - and many of us I guess would have received a  receipt that came via Paypal stating along the lines of the following  .....

You sent a payment of £60.00 GBP to DJModels Ltd.....

Dear xxxxxxxx,

This charge will appear on your statement as payment to PAYPAL *DJMODELSLTD.

etc etc

 

To my (rather simplistic!!)  mind this is a payment to DJM not to Paypal - they were just acting as his bank account holder (and at that time there was no other way of paying anyway) - however were you also in this position or had you formalised (possibly at a later date?) the original transaction with DJM such that you had a separate direct transaction with DJM without Paypal as his account holder? 

I too am anticipating possible pushback from my credit card company (also owned by Lloyds)  and just want to get my case prepared in advance.!!

(Incidentally I now note some other quite wellknown online model suppliers also use this paypal facility - although they haven't done a DJM.... to date).

 

Hi Lochlongside,

 

When I spoke to my CC company on Monday, they asked if I paid via PayPal. I honestly cannot remember the full procedure, but the payment was made from my personal Lloyds AMEX card.

 

I'm not going to follow the CC agenda on this if they intend to focus on PayPal. My position is very simple, and one I will do my best to keep to. That is, I paid  the deposit using my Lloyds AMEX card for a product whose value is £130 that I haven't received, and as of Monday, I believe I will never receive because the manufacturer is commencing insolvency proceedings.

 

I do not intend to entertain discussions about any intermediaries, whether it is PayPal, DJM's bank, or any other bank. That will be allowing them to set the agenda. I will keep to the basic principle that I used my person Lloyds AMEX card, it came out of that account and I haven't / won't receive the goods therefore its a Section 75 claim.

 

BTW #1: The invoice I have does not mention PayPal.

BTW #2: I will dig out my CC statement from that time next week when I get access to my storage boxes to see what it says. If it states DJM then that will add weight to my case. If it doesn't, then I fall back on my approach above. [Edit 6/6/2019: remembered I could download a copy of my CC Statement. It says "PAYPAL * DJMODELSLTD".]

 

HTH.

Edited by Damo666
Added new info on CC Stmt
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just checked my CC statement and it shows a payment made to DJ Models Ltd, Liverpool.
I am waiting to see what unfolds today before I contact them in pursuit of a refund under a section 75 claim.

We can certainly all assist each other on here with our experiences in seeking a refund.

To coin a famous phrase "we are all in this together" , well most of us I assume.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Paying on a credit card via PayPal loses you your Section 75 protection.

 

Paypal is an intermediary so it's not the direct relationship that exists between credit card companies and their merchants.

 

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/PayPal-Section75/

Thanks for this.

 

Don't want to go OT too much, but I remember in the early days of PayPal, before they were owned by eBay, hearing an article on the radio about how you don't have the same protection as with the high street banks.

 

In particular it was relating to how money in your PayPal account could be removed if the other side raises a dispute, the money could be taken several weeks and even months later, and before you had a chance to state your defence. PayPal would take back the money first, then advise you, and then you try to submit a defence. PayPal would take the money first so that you couldn't empty the account leaving them not able to reclaim the money. Of course, the flaw in this is that the other party gets the refund, empties their PayPal account and by the time your defence is accepted, the money is gone.

The financial advice at the time was to be very cautious of PayPal as it wasn't regulated in the UK.

 

This might have changed by now, but it made me very wary of PayPal, and I thought I was been careful since. Seems that PayPal have negated Section 75.

 

I'm now even more wary of PayPal.

 

Forever learning.

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Paypal have not negated section 75.......you will find the card issuers have, when an intermediary is involved such as paypal, it affect all other payment providers.

 

it should be pointed that paypal are not alone in this area, any intermediate payment handling service would be affected also.

 

Paypal have nothing to gain out of section 75, the card issuer would pay a section 75 claim under the comsumer credit act, they do not persue that claim from anyone else.

 

Im a pains to point out, that this was widely talked about when DJmodels were asking for this as a payment method, and its vociferously mentioned that this was misleading advice!

 

if your section 75 claim fails you can request help from the financial ombudsman service, if that still fails, your only recourse is to request to the administrator, or insolvency practitioner, as an unsecured creditor.  If one is indeed appointed.

 

 

Edited by pheaton
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 04/06/2019 at 17:59, Damo666 said:

Thought it best to start a separate thread on experiences of reclaiming (if it’s possible) against any deposits paid. This thread is specifically relating to reclaiming against a credit card. Perhaps someone would start a PayPal thread (or other payment methods) if necessary and keep this one for CC.

 

I paid my deposit for the DJM Class 92 via my Lloyds AMEX credit card in Feb 2017.

I rang my credit card company this afternoon to claim a refund of the £30 deposit. Reason I started a reclaim is based on today’s notification at Companies House of a new registered address for DJM for a business being a ‘licensed insolvency practitioner and business recovery specialists’. *

 

(*In case anyone says I’m jumping the gun, in the UK Building Contracts I use (JCT Form of Contract), if a contractor has commenced discussion on insolvency, “appoints an administrator receiver, receiver or manager of his property, has passed a resolution for voluntary winding-up without declaration of solvency,,…. otherwise entering administration within the meaning of Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986, …. entering into an arrangement, compromise, composition in satisfaction of his debts (unless reconstruction)…..” whether it is concluded or not, the contract is terminated as the person is deemed insolvent within the terms of the building contract. This may not be applicable in cases outside the building industry, but it justifies my approach to the bank to seek a refund of my DJM deposit).

 

Initial response from the bank was that I was outside a 120 day claim period and I should contact Citizen’s Advice.

 

I stated that (1) I was not aware that there was a time limitation on making a claim and (2) I was only aware today that the supplier was in contact with a liquidator, so under the Limitations Act the commencement of any limitation begins today.

 

CC company’s response was, because I only paid £30, it wasn't covered under Section 75.

I pointed out that this too isn’t correct, that I am covered under Section 75 for any amount paid as long as the total amount to be paid for the goods is over £100. It's the total value of the product that is key, not how much I have paid. (up to max £30K I think, but not relevant here).

 

CC company then acknowledged that I am correct, I would be covered under Section 75, and have therefore sent my claim to their claim’s department. I will get a response in 7 – 10 days.

 

I was surprised and disappointed that the CC company’s first two attempts were to rebuff me, as this should be basic knowledge for the CC company. So please be aware that the CC company may try to avoid any claims.

 

Will keep you posted on progress.

I used to work with contracts (ICE standard terms et al).

 

Recently on another matter my partner's credit card company has endeavoured to hoodwink us on three occasions also. There is clearly a breach of contract (plus mis-selling etc) on the part of the vendor in question and now the credit card are trying to get out of their obligations under Section 75 etc.

 

Its a disgrace, same old same old though as the banks stole £trillions in QE and no one batted an eyelid.

 

The credit card companies hate Paypal as PP et al have out flanked them. As the general public, we get caught in the middle, often with both service providers endeavouring to shirk or sidestep their legal obligations and duty of care.

 

All I can say is stay resolute and be VERY assertive with any banking organisation.

 

Good luck.

 

Atvb

 

CME.

Edited by CME and Bottlewasher
additional info/typos
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
18 minutes ago, pheaton said:

Paypal have not negated section 75.......you will find the card issuers have, when an intermediary is involved such as paypal, it affect all other payment providers.

 

it should be pointed that paypal are not alone in this area, any intermediate payment handling service would be affected also.

 

Paypal have nothing to gain out of section 75, the card issuer would pay a section 75 claim under the comsumer credit act, they do not persue that claim from anyone else.

 

Im a pains to point out, that this was widely talked about when DJmodels were asking for this as a payment method, and its vociferously mentioned that this was misleading advice!

 

 

 

It seems you are saying that paying by Paypal should not make a difference to Section 75 claims when that goes against the advise offered on consumer website such as Which and Moneysavingexpert etc, respected newspapers and everywhere else online. Those websites indicate that it can make a difference if they act as an intermediary

 

If that is the case what is your advise on how to pursue claims with credit card companies?

 

It seems to me to be another case where an act needs to be updated (in this case the 1974 consumer rights act) to maintain the protection it originally gave to consumers, and to include recently developed online payment methods

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In all of this, if I recall correctly; DJM stated that Paypal had suspected that some of the payments had been  subject to a Money Laundering investigation by themselves. He stated he had been told by Paypal to refund the Paypal payments. If he was suspected of Money Laundering, due to large payments going in, why did Paypal tell him to issue refunds? If they believed this to be true they were in effect directing to give all the proceeds of crimes back to whoever was trying to launder it. I never thought this was the case because of what I have just written. If I was in this position, I would be contacting Paypal and asking them if this was actually the case. If they issued the order to make refunds, why didn't they simply refund the money back to the originator's accounts? Thereby ensuring compliance.

 

Looking at an internet search this may be helpful. "Click on the words "Help / Contact" at the bottom of paypals pages and use the phone option in the blue band at the top. Log in and get the code.
When you get through don't select any options just hang on till you get transfered to an agent OR just say the word 'Agent'".
In the UK its free from any landline phone."

 

If DJ Models had to refund the money why was some kept for work already carried out and other expenses? I would ask Paypal that question. Of course for Paypal to refund there has to be money in a "linked account"

 

If it's not the case then were you deceived into believing this?

 

All this, not withstanding that there has been no official announcement.

 

These are my own thoughts and not linked to our business.

 

Barry.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is the use of the funds - section 75 applies where there is a direct relationship Debtor-Creditor-Supplier.

 

It does not apply where the funds provided do not go directly to the supplier, for example I get a loan from the bank to buy a car but the money goes into my bank account first and then I pay the supplier of the car from my bank account by debit card or cheque.  The supplier of the credit is not in control of where the funds went so they would not be liable for what happens to that cash once it leaves your account. Similarly in modern transactions if you buy tickets to a concert via an agency then section 75 may not apply because there is not the direct relationship between the creditor and the supplier.

 

Because with Paypal (in most circumstances) the money goes first to Paypal and then on from them to the supplier's account it is deemed to break the Debtor-creditor-supplier relationship and so is not covered by Section 75.

 

My time in credit cards is from 30 years ago, there has been a lot of change in payment mechanisms since that time so i am not a current expert but I can see that the basic D-C-S principle still holds true for claiming.

 

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/section-75-of-the-consumer-credit-act

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...