Overview
A retailer has not delivered, a service was misrepresented or a purchase has a serious unresolved fault. If qualifying credit was used, the supplier may not be the only organisation against which you can claim.
Section 75 is useful, but a successful claim needs more than “I paid by credit card”. Explain the transaction and what the supplier failed to do.
Quick Answer
Ask the credit provider to consider a Section 75 claim for breach of contract or misrepresentation. The usual cash-price range is more than £100 and no more than £30,000, with a qualifying debtor-creditor-supplier relationship.
Part-payment by qualifying credit can be enough. The price of the relevant goods or service matters, not simply the amount charged to the card.
Check the Purchase Before Drafting the Claim
Find the invoice, order confirmation and credit statement. Identify the actual supplier and the item or service being claimed for.
| Check | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Cash price | Determines whether the usual Section 75 price range is met |
| Payment method | Debit cards and ordinary bank transfers do not create the same claim |
| Contracting parties | The credit-supplier relationship needs to qualify |
| Problem | Identify breach of contract or misrepresentation |
| Remedy requested | Explain the refund or other loss you seek |
Intermediaries and payment platforms can make the relationship more complicated. Do not assume every platform payment either always qualifies or always fails.
Our Section 75 explainer covers the eligibility principles.
Explain the Breach in Plain Language
Describe what was promised, what happened and why the difference matters.
For non-delivery, include the agreed delivery date and evidence that the goods did not arrive. For faulty goods, describe the fault, when it appeared and any inspection or repair evidence. For misrepresentation, identify the statement relied on and why it was false.
Avoid a long account of every frustrating phone call before stating the core issue. A short chronology with numbered attachments makes the claim easier to assess.
Do not exaggerate losses or describe an authorised purchase as card fraud just because the supplier later disappointed you.
A Deposit Example
Suppose a sofa costs £1,200. You pay a £100 deposit directly to the supplier by credit card and the remaining £1,100 by bank transfer.
If the legal conditions are met, the potential Section 75 claim is not automatically limited to the £100 card deposit. The relevant cash price is £1,200.
Now suppose you buy separate £60 items and the basket totals £120. Do not assume the basket total alone establishes Section 75 coverage. The structure of the purchase matters.
These examples illustrate eligibility questions, not a guarantee that a particular claim succeeds.
Send a Complete Evidence Pack
Include the order, invoice, payment evidence, relevant terms, correspondence with the supplier and photographs or reports where useful.
State the outcome you want and how you calculated the amount. If you are claiming additional losses, explain why they resulted from the breach and provide receipts.
You do not need to sue the supplier first before raising the credit-provider claim. Nevertheless, records of attempts to resolve the problem can help establish what happened.
Ask for a claim reference and the provider's expected next step. Keep copies of everything sent.
Distinguish the Claim From a Complaint
The claim asks the credit provider to meet its responsibility for the purchase problem. A complaint challenges the provider's handling or decision.
If the claim is rejected, ask for the reason. Is the disagreement about eligibility, the evidence of breach, the amount claimed or a time limit?
Respond to that reason specifically. Resending the same documents without addressing the decision may not move the case forward.
Our chargeback versus Section 75 comparison explains why a failed chargeback does not automatically answer a separate Section 75 question.
Watch the Different Deadlines
Do not apply chargeback's commonly cited 120-day window as a universal Section 75 limit. Court limitation and Financial Ombudsman complaint deadlines are separate, and legal time limits depend on the claim and jurisdiction.
Raise the issue promptly. If the provider sends a final complaint response, read the referral deadline carefully; the Ombudsman normally requires referral within six months of that response, subject to its rules and exceptions.
Our chargeback time-limit guide covers the scheme deadline separately.
Keep the Credit Account in Order
A dispute with the supplier does not automatically suspend payments on the credit account. Ask the card provider how it will handle the disputed amount and keep meeting obligations that remain due.
If a temporary credit appears, ask whether it is final. Do not spend it on the assumption the dispute cannot later change.
Frequently Asked Questions
Browse budgeting and banking guides. This is general information, not legal advice on a particular contract.
