Not upheld: refund claim handling; Section 75 claim assessment complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC trading as Tesco Bank

Decision detail

Summary

Mr F complained to Tesco Bank about a refund for a car rental booking with supplier 'J' after experiencing a 90-minute delay in vehicle collection and receiving an unhygienic vehicle that was subsequently replaced. Tesco Bank correctly rejected a chargeback claim as time-barred (raised in January 2026, more than 120 days after the May 2025 booking). The ombudsman upheld Tesco Bank's handling of the Section 75 claim, finding no breach of contract or misrepresentation by the supplier, as operational delays are common in car rental and the service was ultimately completed with a replacement vehicle provided. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the chargeback claim was time-barred as it was raised more than 120 days after the transaction. Regarding the Section 75 claim, the ombudsman concluded there was no breach of contract because: (1) a 90-minute delay, while inconvenient, is not uncommon in car rental operations and does not breach the implied term of reasonable care and skill; (2) no express terms guaranteed immediate collection; (3) no financial loss was incurred; and (4) the supplier ultimately provided a replacement vehicle and completed the hire. The ombudsman also found no misrepresentation, as the booking confirmation did not represent that collection would occur with no delay whatsoever.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website