Not upheld: chargeback and section 75 claim handling; alleged breach of contract and misrepresentation complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T purchased a dental treatment package abroad for approximately £4,000 using his Santander credit card and was unhappy with the results, claiming the wrong type of crown was used and fillings were improperly carried out. He requested a refund from Santander under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act and chargeback provisions. Santander declined the claim, stating the independent UK dental review did not confirm inherent faults with the work and the original supplier offered remedial consultation. The ombudsman upheld Santander's decision, finding that Mr T failed to provide conclusive evidence of breach of contract or misrepresentation, and that the chargeback had no reasonable prospect of success given the lack of supporting documentation and the supplier's willingness to provide remedial work.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Santander acted fairly in declining the claim because Mr T failed to provide sufficient conclusive evidence of breach of contract, misrepresentation, or grounds for successful chargeback. The UK dentist report could not definitively establish what type of crown was used or confirm the original supplier failed to exercise reasonable skill and care without further investigation. The ombudsman noted that for service contracts, repeat performance is typically the primary remedy rather than automatic refund, and the original supplier had offered further consultation. The ombudsman also found the chargeback had no reasonable prospect of success given the lack of supporting documentation and the supplier's defence that the service was provided and remedial consultation was offered.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website