Capital One (Europe) plc · DRN-5476768

The complaint Mr M complains about a claim he made to Capital One (Europe) plc in respect of a cancelled car rental booking. What happened Mr H paid £127.01 using his Capital One credit card to book a car rental. He made the payment on 2 November 2023 and arranged collection of the vehicle on 3 November 2023. He made the booking through a car rental booking platform who I’ll call C. As Mr M’s flight was cancelled, he cancelled his car rental booking. He asked for a refund but was unable to obtain one as C said he was not entitled to a refund under the cancellation terms on his booking. Mr M brought his payment dispute to Capital One. It considered his dispute and said it could not raise a chargeback as the service was still available to use. It further considered Mr M’s dispute under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Section 75 CCA). It said that as the cancellation had not been made in time to warrant a refund, it could not establish a breach of contract or misrepresentation and so the dispute did not succeed. Mr M brought his complaint to our service. He said he was making a claim for the rental amount under Section 75 and wanted us to consider the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCR) as the contract terms were not fair or transparent, and C had retained payment without providing services. Our investigator considered the complaint and said he couldn’t consider UTCCR as we cannot consider a complaint against the merchant, but rather we are considering whether Capital One has handled Mr M’s Section 75 claim appropriately. Our investigator didn’t think a breach of contract or misrepresentation had been successfully established so the complaint was not upheld. Mr M asked for an ombudsman to consider the complaint. He said he had shown that a breach of contract had taken place, and that the contract had unfair terms which were not transparent. So, the complaint has now been passed to me to decide. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. I would like to start by saying that I have provided a brief summary of the events that occurred above. I intend no discourtesy by this and can assure both parties that I have taken all the information provided into consideration when reaching a decision on this complaint. I will now move on to consider each element of the complaint in turn. Chargeback Chargeback is a voluntary scheme under which settlement disputes are resolved between

-- 1 of 3 --

card issuers and merchants, under the relevant card scheme. A card issuer will review the claim against the possible reasons for a chargeback and look at whether it would be able to make a successful claim for the customer. Card issuers do not have to submit claims and usually will only do so, if it is likely to be successful. We don’t expect them to raise a claim if there is little prospect of success. In this particular case, as the vehicle was available to use until Mr M cancelled the booking, and the cancellation terms were made available, it is likely any such claim would not have been successful. So, I think it was reasonable for Capital One to focus on Section 75. Section 75 Section 75 of the CCA allows – in certain circumstances - for a creditor (Capital One) to be jointly and severally liable for any claim by the debtor (Mr M) of breach of contract or misrepresentation made by a supplier of goods and/or services (C). I must consider the cancellation terms attached to the booking in order to determine whether C’s refusal to process a refund constitutes a breach of contract. The cancellation terms say the following: “To obtain a refund of a prepaid booking you must cancel it at least 48 hours before the start of your rental using the links contained in the voucher or through the "My Booking" section of our website. No refunds will be made if the booking is cancelled after the collection time stated on the rental voucher. No refund will be given if you do not collect the vehicle.” The terms specify that all cancellations must be made at least 48 hours before the start of the rental to obtain a refund, and as this was not done, I do not find that in failing to provide a refund, the contract was breached. As such, the way in which Capital One handled the dispute was reasonable. Considering that the booking itself was made within 48 hours of the collection date and time, Mr M from the time of booking, would never have been in a position to cancel the booking and obtain a refund. Mr M states this is therefore an unfair contract term. He also points out that this information was not clear and transparent before he made the booking. Both the UTCCR and the Consumer Rights Act 2015 carry provisions regarding unfair contract terms. Companies such as C have arrangements with a number of different car rental companies to provide the vehicles being booked through its platform. So depending on the vehicle and company chosen, the terms that apply vary. I have reviewed the website and can see when selecting a vehicle to book, the full terms and conditions that apply to the booking are made available prior to a customer selecting a vehicle and making the booking. I therefore do not agree that the information was not clear or transparent at the time of booking. In addition, Mr M said he never had the option to cancel due to when he booked. Mr M was provided with enough information to make an informed decision about whether this booking and its terms were right for him before he accepted the booking. Under the provisions listed above I have considered whether there might be anything else that affects Mr M’s claim in relation to Section 75 and I don’t find this to be the case. So, overall, I don’t find that Capital One has treated Mr M unfairly when handling his claim. My final decision My final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint.

-- 2 of 3 --

Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 27 June 2025. Vanisha Patel Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --