Not upheld: refund request handling - chargeback and Section 75 claim assessment complaint against Capital One (Europe) plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs S booked a hotel stay for £900 on her Capital One credit card but the hotel experienced operational issues. The hotel notified Mrs S in advance that services would be limited and offered her a refund or the option to proceed with a price reduction. Mrs S chose to proceed and received a 300 euro discount. She later complained to Capital One seeking a full refund, claiming misrepresentation and breach of contract. Capital One declined both a chargeback (due to no unused services) and a Section 75 claim (finding no false statement at booking and that Mrs S had accepted the variation by proceeding). The ombudsman upheld Capital One's decision, finding it acted fairly given Mrs S's prior knowledge of the issues and the price reduction already received.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Capital One acted fairly in declining both the chargeback and Section 75 claim. For the chargeback, there was no unused portion of services to dispute as Mrs S stayed the full duration. For the Section 75 claim, no false statement of fact was made at the time of booking nine months prior, and Mrs S was aware of the issues before deciding to stay. The price reduction already provided constituted a suitable remedy for any potential breach of contract. The ombudsman acknowledged Mrs S's difficult circumstances but found it reasonable for Capital One to consider that Mrs S had accepted the variation of contract by proceeding with the stay after being informed of the reduced services.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website