Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against MARKS AND SPENCER FINANCIAL SERVICES PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs C purchased a vehicle from V in November 2025, paying £5,000 via her M&S credit card with the remainder from a joint account. When V identified a safety concern in December 2025, Mr C requested a refund which V refused. Mrs C asked M&S for help, and M&S raised a chargeback claim but declined to pursue a Section 75 claim, stating no valid debtor-creditor-supplier agreement existed. The ombudsman upheld M&S's decision, finding that although the vehicle was for joint use and Mrs C paid part of it, the contract was entered into by Mr C (as shown by the invoice and registration documents being in his name), meaning Mrs C had no contractual relationship with V and therefore could not make a valid Section 75 claim.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that for a valid Section 75 claim to exist, a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement must be in place, which requires the consumer to have contracted with the supplier. The evidence clearly showed that Mr C (not Mrs C) entered into the contract with V, as demonstrated by the invoice, registration documents, and correspondence all being in Mr C's name. While the vehicle was intended for joint use and Mrs C paid for part of it, the contractual relationship was between Mr C and V, not Mrs C and V. Therefore, Mrs C could not make a valid Section 75 claim against M&S. The ombudsman also noted that M&S acted reasonably by pursuing a chargeback claim, which was the only remaining avenue available.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website