Not upheld: refund claim handling under Section 75 Consumer Credit Act 1974 and chargeback procedures complaint against Marks & Spencer Financial Services Plc trading as M&S Bank

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs O claimed a refund for a 2023 holiday after she and her family became unwell and were isolated by the hotel, preventing use of all-inclusive amenities. She contacted M&S Bank nearly two years later requesting refunds for flights and hotel via Section 75 claim. M&S Bank declined, citing the chargeback deadline had passed and no breach of contract existed. The ombudsman upheld M&S Bank's decision, finding the chargeback was time-barred, the flights were received as paid for, and the hotel's isolation recommendation was a reasonable health measure rather than a contractual breach, with services continuing to be provided.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found M&S Bank acted fairly because: (1) chargeback was not possible as Mrs O contacted the bank nearly two years after the holiday, well beyond the 120-day requirement; (2) for the flight payment, Mrs O received the service paid for with no breach of contract; (3) for the hotel payment, while Mrs O could not use all amenities due to isolation, the hotel's letter showed isolation was a recommendation for health and safety, not a breach of contract, and the hotel continued providing accommodation and food; (4) Mrs O provided no evidence the hotel caused the illness; (5) health-related restrictions by accommodation providers are standard practice and do not constitute breach of contract.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website