can't get deposit back, need advice

[BTJ]

I went to Denlo and had a similar thing happen about 6 years ago. Deposit down to secure the car while finance was checked.

i didn't get the finance and they put the deposit back onto my credit card, BUT, it did take a few weeks and several email/phone calls.

have bought 2 VWs since and wouldn't go back there to have my floormats cleaned.

[Dubba]

I would advise you to go to fair trading. Try your best, but dont expect too much, they're all wankers

[tigger73]

Otherwise put it back on them. Tell them the finance deal you were knocked back on and tell them to better it or refund you. Give them 3 working days to come back to you.

[Muri777]

well heres an update:

spoke to a fella at VW HQ and he told me they were in the wrong to keep the money since i hadn't signed anything so i went ahead and called my bank and asked them to reverse they payment. they put a dispute in and cancelled my card, they're sending me a new one soon.

tried getting a hold of denlo VW's sales manager and principal neither of them got back to me luls.

so as it stands, anz are investigating it atm.

[MACCAA]

You won't have a problem.
If they can't produce a signed credit card slip,the Bank will reverse it.
Credit cards were designed to have signatures ie face to face transactions.
I know we all do over the phone/Internet transactions,but if it all goes pear shaped [disputed] the merchant doesn't have a leg to stand on.
In the case of a dispute,Bank sends Merchant a letter asking for copy of signed slip.
No sign,no money.
However don't know why they cancelled your card......not normal if you just dispute a charge.
Cheers
Len

[pologti18t]

If they can't produce a signed credit card slip,the Bank will reverse it.
Credit cards were designed to have signatures ie face to face transactions.
I know we all do over the phone/Internet transactions,but if it all goes pear shaped [disputed] the merchant doesn't have a leg to stand on.

If that truly was the case the whole internet and phone based businesses would not be viable.
When the OP made the transaction the person at the other end would have asked for the card number, name on card, expiry date and maybe the CVC. Only a person who has physical ownership of the card should be able to give that information
Its called a card not present transaction. People have done them for years.

To think you can dispute a valid transaction just because there is no signature (or ability to provide one) is naive.

PS: Signatures on cards will be phased out in the coming years.
PPS: People are nuts who rely on signatures for EFT/POS machine trans. PIN is the more secure way to go.

[MACCAA]

If that truly was the case the whole internet and phone based businesses would not be viable.
When the OP made the transaction the person at the other end would have asked for the card number, name on card, expiry date and maybe the CVC. Only a person who has physical ownership of the card should be able to give that information
Its called a card not present transaction. People have done them for years.

To think you can dispute a valid transaction just because there is no signature (or ability to provide one) is naive.

PS: Signatures on cards will be phased out in the coming years.
PPS: People are nuts who rely on signatures for EFT/POS machine trans. PIN is the more secure way to go.

Nothing naive about it at all.
By your logic anyone with physical possession of a card can use it-even if it's not theirs.
You say "only a person who has physical ownership of the card should be able to give that information"
Doesn't make it their card,does it?
So what do you think PIN numbers and signatures are for?
Just because you have physical ownership of the card doesn't make it yours.....or the card owner liable for the debt.
I was a Financial Controller for 30 years,and in case of a charge dispute by a customer,the first and only thing the Bank or issuing card authority did,was ask for a copy of the signed slip.
The Phone/Internet business exists in spite of this,but if there's a dispute......

[DkN]

Nothing naive about it at all.
By your logic anyone with physical possession of a card can use it-even if it's not theirs.
You say "only a person who has physical ownership of the card should be able to give that information"
Doesn't make it their card,does it?
So what do you think PIN numbers and signatures are for?
Just because you have physical ownership of the card doesn't make it yours.....or the card owner liable for the debt.
I was a Financial Controller for 30 years,and in case of a charge dispute by a customer,the first and only thing the Bank or issuing card authority did,was ask for a copy of the signed slip.
The Phone/Internet business exists in spite of this,but if there's a dispute......

What you're saying makes sense for fraudulent transactions, but unless you are disputing it as a fraudulent transaction (which it isn't), why should the signature matter? Using the fraud system as a loophole is one thing but if you're arguing your case honestly then there was already authorisation, you're just after your money back because the transaction fell through. You should get it back, regardless of proof of authorisation of the original transaction.

On another note for VW in house finance.. I hope people realise they are throwing money away if they don't haggle the dealers. Cheaper interest rates, and in some cases with other dealers even zero interest, are all adjusted against how much the dealer will discount you when you haggle. Makes no difference in the end, or you might even end up paying a bit more.

[Mk3 AAA]

PPS: People are nuts who rely on signatures for EFT/POS machine trans. PIN is the more secure way to go.

I agree on a whole, but you clearly haven't seen my signature, it would have to be done with a crayon and 15 beers on board to be replicated accurately enough.