Section 75 Claim vs Chargeback
The key differences between a statutory section 75 claim under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and a chargeback under card scheme rules — when to use each and their respective strengths and limitations.
Overview
When a trader fails to deliver goods or services, or goes insolvent, consumers who paid by card have two potential routes to recover their money: a section 75 claim against the credit card provider (a statutory right under the Consumer Credit Act 1974) or a chargeback through the card scheme (a contractual rule applied by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express). Both mechanisms can result in a refund, but they operate under fundamentally different legal bases, apply to different card types, have different time limits, and provide different levels of protection.
Side-by-Side Comparison
Section 75 Claim
Pros
- Statutory right — cannot be taken away by card provider terms and conditions
- Applies to the full purchase price, not just the amount paid on the credit card
- 6-year limitation period (Limitation Act 1980) — far more time than chargeback
- Binding on the card provider — escalate to the Financial Ombudsman Service if refused
- Applies even if only a small deposit was paid by credit card
- Covers misrepresentation as well as breach of contract
Cons
- Only applies to credit cards — not debit cards or prepaid cards
- Cash price of the item must be between £100 and £30,000
- Does not apply to transactions processed through certain third-party payment processors (disputed)
- Takes longer than chargeback — card provider has 8 weeks to respond
Best For
Credit card purchases of items costing £100–£30,000 where the trader has breached the contract, committed misrepresentation, or become insolvent. The clear first choice where the eligibility criteria are met.
Chargeback
Pros
- Applies to both credit and debit cards (debit card users have no section 75 right)
- No minimum or maximum transaction value
- Can be faster than a section 75 claim for straightforward cases
- Available for a range of reasons: non-delivery, counterfeit goods, incorrect amount charged, cancelled recurring transactions
Cons
- Not a statutory right — the bank has discretion and can refuse
- Short time limit: typically 120 days from payment or expected delivery (varies by card scheme)
- Bank may only refund the amount paid on the card — not a wider claim covering full purchase value
- Trader can rebut the chargeback (a 'representment'), which the bank may accept
- No equivalent of the Financial Ombudsman Service to challenge refusals on legal grounds
Best For
Debit card payments of any amount; credit card payments under £100; time-sensitive situations where a quick refund is needed; situations where section 75 does not apply.
Key Differences
Our Recommendation
If you paid by credit card and the item cost more than £100 and up to £30,000, use section 75 — it is a statutory right, has a 6-year time limit, and the card provider cannot refuse without good reason. If you paid by debit card or the item cost under £100, use chargeback — but act quickly as the 120-day window is a hard limit. In cases of trader insolvency, section 75 is the most powerful tool: the card provider steps into the trader's shoes and cannot avoid liability because the trader is insolvent.