Not upheld: refund claims handling - chargeback and Section 75 claim processing complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr G complained to NatWest about refund claims relating to credit card transactions made to an online gambling services provider, arguing that incorrect merchant category codes were used and that his account was improperly reopened. Mr G sought to pursue both chargeback and Section 75 claims, but NatWest declined to progress them. The ombudsman found that NatWest acted fairly because Mr G failed to provide sufficient evidence that the transactions were misrepresented or that there was a breach of contract, and the gambling provider's explanation regarding account reopening with explicit consent was not adequately contradicted. While NatWest's communication could have been clearer, this did not warrant compensation. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that NatWest could not have progressed chargeback claims without evidence that the services provided were different from the MCC codes used. The burden was on Mr G to prove the transactions were misrepresented, which is extremely difficult. For the S75 claim, NatWest needed evidence of breach of contract or misrepresentation, but the gambling provider's explanation that the account was reopened with explicit consent, combined with the absence of contract terms, meant there was insufficient evidence to support a valid claim. While NatWest's communication could have been clearer, this did not cause significant distress warranting compensation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website