-
Hi
Question from a newbie here.
I have seen on another thread yesterday, a suggestion that as the card holder you can buy something for somebody else, they pay you back, then you get whatever reward is applicable from that spend.
However I am under the impression that this would break the debtor/creditor relationship. So if whatever was bought and lets say could not be used, you as the credit card holder could not claim S75 refund because you are not the debtor. Am I correct in this thinking?
Say I bought a flight for somebody (where I was not travelling with them), they paid me back and then the airline went bust before the flight.
In this case neither I nor the passenger could perform a chargeback.
An S75 might be appropriate, but as the flight was not for me, would I be able to claim for the flight from the card company?
TIAA chargeback is a different thing from S75.
Since you don’t appear to be the direct beneficiary of the purchase then I don’t think s75 applies.
As above, you wouldn’t get s75 cover in your example. Nor does a supplementary cardholder get s75 cover for flights, goods or services they buy for themselves for the same reasons.
So what you’re claiming is that if I book a golfing holiday for 2, and my mate pays me for his share of the holiday, I’m covered by S75, but he isn’t.
Not sure if that’s in the spirit of S75.
So what you’re claiming is that if I book a golfing holiday for 2, and my mate pays me for his share of the holiday, I’m covered by S75, but he isn’t.
Not sure if that’s in the spirit of S75.
No both of you are covered as you are one of the recipients and both of you are travelling together.
If you end up not travelling you could claim under s75 (assuming it was a booking directly with the provider, problematic if booked via an OTA) but you presumably would then refund your mate?
So what you’re claiming is that if I book a golfing holiday for 2, and my mate pays me for his share of the holiday, I’m covered by S75, but he isn’t.
Not sure if that’s in the spirit of S75.
No both of you are covered as you are one of the recipients and both of you are travelling together.
If you end up not travelling you could claim under s75 (assuming it was a booking directly with the provider, problematic if booked via an OTA) but you presumably would then refund your mate?
Unfortunately I don’t think that’s correct unless the other traveller is a dependant.
So what you’re claiming is that if I book a golfing holiday for 2, and my mate pays me for his share of the holiday, I’m covered by S75, but he isn’t.
Not sure if that’s in the spirit of S75.
No both of you are covered as you are one of the recipients and both of you are travelling together.
If you end up not travelling you could claim under s75 (assuming it was a booking directly with the provider, problematic if booked via an OTA) but you presumably would then refund your mate?
Unfortunately I don’t think that’s correct unless the other traveller is a dependant.
I believe it depends on whether @Andrew. pays for one or two separate bookings eg if each contracts individually to go on the same holiday but Andrew pays the bill for both then he is covered for his own holiday but the friend is not. If however he makes one booking with both their names on the reservation then both of them are covered. You do not need to be related for this to work. Obviously it is easier if friends pay for their own reservation directly.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
