Section 75: the $100 rule that almost everyone gets wrong
The threshold applies to the price of the item, not the amount you put on the card. That one misunderstanding costs people thousands.
Head of Card Disputes
Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the strongest consumer protection most people have never used. It makes your credit card provider jointly and severally liable with the retailer for any breach of contract or misrepresentation.
Joint and several liability means you can pursue either of them for the whole amount. You do not have to chase the retailer first, and you do not have to prove the retailer cannot pay. You can simply claim against the card provider.
The three conditions
- The purchase was on a credit card, not a debit card, not a prepaid card.
- The cash price of a single item or service is more than $100 and no more than $30,000.
- There is a debtor–creditor–supplier relationship. broadly, you bought from the supplier rather than through certain kinds of intermediary.
The bit almost everybody gets wrong
Condition two says the cash price of the item must exceed $100. It does not say the amount you paid on the card must exceed $100.
You can pay a $150 deposit by credit card and the remaining $14,850 by bank transfer, and the provider can be liable for the entire $15,000.
This is not a loophole or a clever argument. It is how the section has always worked. But providers decline claims on this basis constantly, and consumers accept the refusal because it sounds reasonable.
If you have been told your claim fails because you only put a small amount on the card, that refusal is very likely wrong. Go back and say so in writing.
Why it beats chargeback
| Chargeback | Section 75 | |
|---|---|---|
| Legal status | Card scheme rule | Statute |
| Cards covered | Debit and credit | Credit only |
| Minimum value | None | Cash price over $100 |
| Maximum value | None | $30,000 cash price |
| Time limit | Usually 120 days | 6 years, 5 in Scotland |
| Consequential loss | No | Yes |
| Survives insolvency | Yes | Yes |
Consequential loss
Because the provider's liability mirrors the retailer's, it extends to losses caused by the breach, not just the price you paid.
A faulty washing machine that floods a kitchen supports a claim for the machine and the flooring. A conservatory built to the wrong specification supports a claim for the cost of putting it right, which can exceed the original contract.
Providers rarely volunteer this. Quantify it and claim it.
When the chain breaks
The debtor–creditor–supplier requirement is where genuine arguments arise. Buying through certain intermediaries can break the chain, because the money went to someone other than the supplier of the goods.
This is fact-specific and providers overstate it. Establish who your money actually went to before accepting that the chain was broken.
How to claim
Write to the card provider, not the retailer. State that the claim is under Section 75, give the cash price, give the card payment, describe the breach or misrepresentation, and quantify the loss including consequential elements.
Give them eight weeks for a final response. If they refuse, you have six months from that letter to refer it to the Financial Ombudsman, free of charge.
Our Section 75 letter template covers the eligibility points providers most often get wrong.
One practical habit
If you are about to pay a large deposit for anything. a kitchen, a car, a wedding, a holiday. put at least a hundred pounds of it on a credit card, even if you pay the rest another way and clear the card immediately.
It costs you nothing and it converts an unsecured payment into one where a solvent, regulated institution is jointly liable for the whole thing. It is the single most useful piece of consumer money advice we know.
Topics
Callum Reid
Head of Card Disputes
CICM
Callum has run several thousand chargeback and Section 75 claims and knows the reason codes the way most people know their own postcode. He wrote the internal guidance the whole team works from and retrains everyone whenever the scheme rules change.
More from Callum ReidRelated reading
Debit or credit: the protection gap nobody explains at the till
Section 75 applies to credit cards only. Paying $150 of a large purchase by credit card and clearing it immediately costs nothing and transforms…
Your bank can stop a subscription payment without the company's permission
You can instruct your bank to cancel a continuous payment authority and it must act. It cannot require you to sort it out with…
Do you actually need a claims company? Usually not.
Every route we use is free and open to you directly. Here is when doing it yourself is straightforwardly better, and the narrower set…