Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against Curve UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M purchased furniture through Samsung Pay+ and was dissatisfied with the quality and alleged misrepresentation of origins. He disputed the transactions through Curve, which requested additional evidence to support a chargeback claim. Mr M stated he could not provide further evidence, and the claim fell outside chargeback timeframes. Mr M also sought section 75 protection, which Curve correctly declined as Samsung Pay+ breaks the required debtor-creditor-supplier relationship. The ombudsman found Curve acted fairly, as the evidence was insufficient for a successful chargeback and section 75 would not have applied or succeeded.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Mr M's evidence was insufficient to meet the strict Mastercard chargeback criteria, which require clear demonstration that goods were faulty or not as described. The ombudsman determined that Curve properly requested additional evidence and gave Mr M reasonable opportunity to provide it. Regarding section 75, the ombudsman found that Samsung Pay+ legitimately breaks the DCS agreement, removing section 75 protections, and that even if such a claim were available, it would not have succeeded due to lack of sufficient evidence of misrepresentation or breach of contract.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website