Not upheld: Section 75 claim handling and chargeback decision complaint against Lloyds Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W booked a package holiday through a travel agent for approximately £1,400 using a credit card and requested a twin room. Upon arrival, he was provided a room with a double bed and pull-out bed instead. He raised a Section 75 claim with Lloyds Bank PLC, but Lloyds declined it, stating there was no evidence of a guaranteed twin room or breach of contract. The ombudsman upheld Lloyds' decision, finding that while Mr W requested a twin room, the booking confirmation did not specify this as guaranteed, the supplier's terms stated such requests were not guaranteed, and the room provided was broadly in line with the 'double or twin beds' description. Without evidence of the booking call or other documentation confirming a guarantee, the ombudsman concluded there was no misrepresentation or breach of contract, and Lloyds acted fairly in not pursuing a chargeback either.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Mr W requested a twin room, there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that T guaranteed this request would be fulfilled. The booking confirmation did not specify a twin room, and the supplier's terms and conditions explicitly stated such requests were not guaranteed. Without evidence of the booking call or other documentation confirming a guarantee, the ombudsman concluded there was no misrepresentation. Regarding breach of contract, the room provided (double bed with pull-out bed) was broadly in line with the booking description of 'double or twin beds', and Mr W's claim about the sea view difference was not substantiated. Therefore, Lloyds acted fairly in declining the Section 75 claim and in not pursuing a chargeback, as there was insufficient evidence to support either claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website