Credit card 法律 can save shoppers

By SIMON MOON
Updated: 05:00 BST, 23 June 2007

?

Plastic cards are often 非難するd for dragging too many of us into 負債. But using a credit card could be your best defence if goods you buy fail to appear or are 欠陥のある, or you are a 犠牲者 of bad service.

This is because the 法律 明言する／公表するs that the credit card company is 合法的に liable when things go wrong. Unfortunately, the 法律 in question - Section 75 of the 消費者 Credit 行為／法令／行動する 1974 - is much-misunderstood by shoppers and retailers and the result is hundreds of （民事の）告訴s each year to the 財政上の Ombudsman Service.

The FOS has just 問題／発行するd fresh 指導／手引 on Section 75 to 追い散らす some of the more ありふれた myths and 誤解s. 'The first is the belief の中で some 貸す人s that 消費者s can only （人命などを）奪う，主張する against them after they have first 告訴するd the provider of the goods or services,' says the FOS. 'In fact, no such 必要物／必要条件 存在するs and 消費者s can choose which party to （人命などを）奪う，主張する against.

'The second is the belief by some 消費者s that Section 75 する権利を与えるs them to a refund on any 購入（する） made with credit. Some 消費者s also 混乱させる the 権利s given to them by Section 75 with the (a)自動的な／(n)自動拳銃 保険 ニュース報道 that some credit card issuers 供給する.'

When 消費者s trying to make a （人命などを）奪う，主張する are fobbed off by their credit card company, they may spend time and 成果／努力 trying to 追求する a 仲買人 who is difficult to trace. The FOS 警告するs card companies to 推定する／予想する an 付加 刑罰，罰則 if 顧客s are 扱う／治療するd 不公平に: 'If it seems to us that the 貸す人 has misled the 消費者 about the 準備／条項s of Section 75, and this has 原因（となる）d the 消費者 unnecessary expense or inconvenience, then this is likely to be 反映するd in any award we may make.'

The FOS says that for Section 75 to 適用する, the に引き続いて 条件s must all be 満足させるd:

? The cash price of the goods or services bought must be at least £100 and no more than £30,000.

? The 量 of credit 供給するd に向かって the 購入（する） must not 越える £25,000, and must have been 供給するd to an 'individual', which 含むs 単独の 仲買人s, small 共同s and unincorporated 商売／仕事s, 同様に as ordinary 消費者s.

? The provider of credit must be in the 商売／仕事 of lending money, and the credit 協定 must have been made in the course of that 商売／仕事.

? The credit must have been 供給するd to the 消費者 under pre-存在するing 手はず／準備 between the provider of credit and the 供給者 of the goods and services.

If all these 条件s are 満足させるd, there is a '貸す人-borrower-供給者' chain, says the ombudsman, and 'the 貸す人 will have equal 義務／負債 for misrepresentation or 違反 of 契約 by the merchant'. But it 追加するs: 'There is no (a)自動的な／(n)自動拳銃 entitlement to a refund under Section 75 where, for example, the 顧客 has 簡単に changed their mind.'

The FOS points out that Section 75 covers more than just 欠陥のある goods. 容認できない service from a tradesman may also be covered where, for example, bad workmanship can be shown to be a 違反 of 契約.

In April 2008, the 最大限 財政上の 限界 of £25,000 for 規制するd credit 協定s will be 除去するd. The FOS says the 影響 of this has not been 完全に understood by some 消費者s who think Section 75 ニュース報道 will change next year. 'In fact, the cash price 限界s within Section 75 will not be 影響する／感情d by the changes in April 2008 ? so we will still be unable to consider （人命などを）奪う，主張するs about 購入（する）s costing more then £30,000,' says the FOS.