Lesson Learned. Girlfriend Content.

[irc]

Letter in financial agony aunt pages of Times today.

Guy let's girlfriend book them a holiday using his credit card. £622.

They split up. He phoned holiday co to cancel. Told nothing to do with you booked in name of girlfriend. In fact by the time he phoned his name had been taken off and replaced with one of her pals.

Card company also told him to do one. No section 75 applied as merchant had provided service. No refund as card was used with his permission.

Sounds like he is well shot. Might be cheap in the long run.

[MitchT]

If that's the direction that her moral compass points in then it's £622 well spent.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

MitchT said:

If that's the direction that her moral compass points in then it's £622 well spent.

Definitely. He got a bargain there.

[Bobtherallyfan]

Why doesn’t he simply say the card wasn’t used with his permission which presumably means it’s fraud. Gets his money back and drops the ex with a criminal conviction. Sorted.

[irc]

Bobtherallyfan said:

Why doesn’t he simply say the card wasn’t used with his permission which presumably means it’s fraud. Gets his money back and drops the ex with a criminal conviction. Sorted.

Because two wrongs don't make right. In any case a tough one to prove when the card was used o book a joint holiday.

[J1990]

I'm not sure I've got any sympathy really... I don't think this is an issue for the travel agent or for the credit card provider. This is a relationship problem and he allowed her to use his card to book something in her name. Regardless of whether he was supposed to be going with her or not he hasn't left himself with a leg to stand on.

£622? The man should be rubbing his hands together and thanking his lucky stars it wasn't substantially more.

[EFH189]

£622 for the bullet to dodge her sounds decent.

[LeadFarmer]

Bobtherallyfan said:

Why doesn’t he simply say the card wasn’t used with his permission which presumably means it’s fraud. Gets his money back and drops the ex with a criminal conviction. Sorted.

Because he would be committing fraud. One word against the others so no proof for conviction, more of a civil matter, so why risk committing fraud yourself especially when when there's no benefit. They would say he should have reported the fraud at the time, plus he's already told them it was with his permission.

[Iminquarantine]

If it was not £622, but £62,220 you could still be saying afterwards, “that could have been a lot worse”. Bargain of the year.

[Enut]

Yep, a bargain at £622.

He should probably make sure anyone else interested in dating her knows this story too, forewarned is forearmed.

[Simpo Two]

Iminquarantine said:

If it was not £622, but £62,220 you could still be saying afterwards, “that could have been a lot worse”. Bargain of the year.

Indeed, I have a friend who suffered a similar stunt maybe 15 years ago - and is still paying it off.

[vulture1]

Turn up at the airport and take the seat next to her

[Mr_Megalomaniac]

Bobtherallyfan said:

Why doesn’t he simply say the card wasn’t used with his permission which presumably means it’s fraud. Gets his money back and drops the ex with a criminal conviction. Sorted.

I agree it sounds like fraud. That's the route I'd take in such a scenario at least.

[Four Seasons Total Landscaping]

Small Claims? At least he might have the satisfaction of getting a CCJ against her, even if it's only for his half of the holiday.