Partially upheld: misrepresentation and inadequate handling of chargeback claim complaint against AMERICAN EXPRESS SERVICES EUROPE LIMITED
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6345668 of 2026-05-08T00:00:00+00:00. misrepresentation and inadequate handling of chargeback claim complaint against AMERICAN EXPRESS SERVICES EUROPE LIMITED. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6345668 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-08T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | AMERICAN EXPRESS SERVICES EUROPE LIMITED |
| Product | credit card |
| Claim type | misrepresentation and inadequate handling of chargeback claim |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | AESEL must: (1) Rework Mr G's credit card balance as though he paid £300 for the computer (reducing the charge by £140); (2) Pay 8% simple interest on any resulting credit balance from when the account entered credit until it came out of credit or refund is made; (3) Refund postage costs of £6.55; (4) Pay £80 compensation for distress and inconvenience. |
Summary
Mr G purchased a refurbished computer for £440 advertised as including 'magic mouse' and 'magic keyboard' accessories, but received cheap plastic alternatives instead. After retailers E and A refused refunds, Mr G asked AESEL (his credit card issuer) for help. AESEL raised a chargeback which was defended by the merchant, and AESEL decided not to pursue arbitration. AESEL also concluded there was no misrepresentation under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding a clear misrepresentation had occurred but determining a full refund was unfair since Mr G still needed the computer. AESEL was ordered to reduce the charge by £140 (accessory cost), refund £6.55 postage, and pay £80 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that AESEL failed to properly consider the evidence of misrepresentation. The product was clearly advertised as including specific 'magic' accessories, but Mr G received different items. While a misrepresentation occurred, the ombudsman determined that voiding the entire contract would be unfair because Mr G initially wanted to keep the computer and only return the accessories. The ombudsman concluded that a price reduction of £140 (the cost of the accessories) was fair and reasonable, along with refund of postage costs and compensation for poor handling of the claim. The ombudsman also found AESEL could have done more to pursue the chargeback to arbitration, as the merchant's defence did not adequately rebut Mr G's evidence.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| AMERICAN EXPRESS SERVICES EUROPE LIMITED, all decisions | 1,319 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website