Not upheld: refund handling and Section 75 claim processing complaint against MBNA Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs A purchased airline flights for approximately £500 using a credit card. When the flights were cancelled, the airline provided account credits instead of a cash refund. Mrs A requested MBNA's assistance in obtaining a refund and MBNA asked for evidence that the credits had been cancelled before issuing one. Mrs A complained that MBNA should have provided the refund without this condition. The ombudsman found MBNA's request for evidence was reasonable to prevent potential double benefit and that the onus was on Mrs A to prove her Section 75 claim. The complaint was not upheld, though MBNA subsequently agreed to provide a refund after Mrs A provided evidence the credits had expired.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that MBNA's request for evidence that credits had been cancelled was reasonable and not unreasonable. The ombudsman understood MBNA's concern about potential double benefit if a refund was issued while credits remained available. The onus is on the consumer to prove a valid Section 75 claim, and MBNA had reached out to the airline to support Mrs A's claim. The ombudsman noted that chargeback was not available as the claim was made more than 120 days after the anticipated performance date.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website