This article is over two days old and may contain outdated advice from the authorities regarding the koronasmitten.
Keep yourself updated in The overview, or through the FHIs website.
This believes the lawyer Svein Kjetil Lode Svendsen at The law firm the Fire.
According to advokatkontoret can the scheme be of relevance to very many people in the Uk who have paid for something that is korona-cancelled this spring.
the Fire,-the lawyer believes the scheme is surprisingly little known among consumers.
most people are aware of what insurance cover you have through your credit card. But few know that it also is very well covered by cancellations as companies or event organizers refuse to refund. In these days is this very appropriate, ” says Lode Svendsen.
Russen lost 35 million
He represents for the time thousands of russ who have initiated a legal process against the Amusement for that landstreffet in may is cancelled.
14.500 russ have paid in excess of 35 million to the California Recreational as, which owns and operates the Amusement.
also Read: NHH professor believes russen need to get your money back
the Organizer refuses to refund the money because they think the cashier of the company is revealed.
Now, have the lawyers at the Fire thus found a new solution on the floken, as they first recommend russen to try.
the Solution involves to claim a refund from his own bank. Then banks must take the matter further with the operating company to Amusement.
Applies to most types of purchases
on Thursday, went to several lawyers in the company through kortavtalene at a variety of financial institutions.
the Review made them, according to the Lode Svendsen, ensure that consumers have the right on their side in these cases.
– in case of delivery from the operator’s side can a consumer, for the Norwegian financial contracts act, always keep the credit card company, or similar company, responsible for the amount that is paid into, ” says Svein Kjetil Lode Svendsen.
Russen considering legal action against the Amusement, but now recommend the lawyer to their to first correct the claims against the various banks.
Photo: Anders Fehn / NRK
He says this will apply to the purchase through the credit card, or other credit such as an invoice from Klarna.
According to the Lode Svendsen will also purchase through the debit card usually be covered.
Here are the amount charged to the bank account immediately.
All who have paid the tickets in this way, should therefore urgently promote to their card issuer or bank, ” says the lawyer.
Late Thursday night he sent a letter to their contacts at russen.
Thursday evening-oriented lawyers russen about the new developments in the case.
In the letter, emphasizes the Lode Svendsen that Amusement, in their view, have an enduring obligation to pay russen money back.
The law firm still recommend russen to correct the claims against their own banks because this is easier, faster and will require less coordination and organization from the russens page.
– Banks can go against the king’s park
Banks can, in turn, correct the losses on to the Amusement. The advantage for russen is that it then becomes the banks and not russen who must bear the risk of loss if the company operating the Amusement does not have the means to make up, ” says Svein Kjetil Lode Svendsen.
He says that the russen must report such claims as soon as possible.
Lode Svendsen emphasises that the right to a refund from the banks and card issuers depends on the customer first has submitted the claim towards the organizer.
– the Norwegian Consumer council offers a complaint – and meklingsordning for consumers that are well-suited for subject matters like this, and that make it possible to promote the requirements without the use of a lawyer in the first place, ” says Lode Svendsen.
Finance Norway: – Suppliers can not expect that the banks are cleaning up
Finance Norway finance norway, and represents the 240 finansbedrifter.
director of Communications Jan Erik Fåne mean it as a lawyer Svein Kjetil Lode Svendsen points out, is a “relatively well-known rule in the Norwegian financial contracts act”.
Jan Erik Fåne, Finance Norway.
Fåne believes that the consumer does not get any better by promoting the claim against the bank.
– the Bank’s liability is limited to the requirements of the consumer could be directed against the seller or the supplier. It is therefore not the case that the suppliers of goods and services may refuse to deliver, and then expect that the banks make up with disappointed customers.
He says that banks, in those cases where they do up on behalf of the suppliers, in turn, will go to suppliers in order to get the money back afterwards.
More about koronaviruset StatusRåd and infoSiste nyttSpør NRK