Equally Liable

There are two companies that owe you the money.

The seller has your money and will not put it right. Perhaps they have stopped answering. Perhaps they have gone under altogether.

Before you write it off, answer one question. Did any part of it go on a credit card?

Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 says that where you have a claim against the seller "in respect of a misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor."

A like claim. The same claim, against a regulated company with a complaints process, that answers to the Financial Ombudsman.

This book prints what the law actually says, with the section number attached:

• that the �0 and �,000 limits in section 75(3)(b) attach to "any single item to which the supplier has attached a cash price", not to the amount you put on the card, so a �0 deposit on a �000 kitchen is a �000 claim;
• that you do not have to chase the seller first, because liability is joint and several, and the requirement to try the supplier belongs to section 75A, which applies above �,000 and is weaker;
• that section 75(4) preserves the protection even where the purchase took you over your credit limit;
• that under section 56(2) what the salesman told you was said as the lender's agent, and under section 56(3) any small print saying otherwise is void;
• and that the deadline is six years under section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980, not six months.

Then it does the work. The eligibility check. The claim letter, written out to copy. The schedule of loss. What to enclose. And a chapter answering each of the standard refusals: go back to the retailer, you didn't pay us enough, the chain is broken, you're out of time.

It is honest about the limits. Chargeback is not this: it is a card scheme rule rather than law, it runs in months rather than years, and for a debit card it is the only route there is, which is why it gets a chapter and not a footnote. The chain really can break if you paid an agent or a platform rather than the supplier, and that is the commonest reason a good claim fails. Some refusals are correct, and this book helps you tell which. Above �,000 there is a genuine gap in the law, and it says so.

United Kingdom. The six year period quoted is from the Limitation Act 1980, covering England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Scotland is shorter and no figure is printed for it.

Information, not legal or financial advice. Current as of August 2026.