|
I've said it before, a very wise man pointed out to me:
if VISA/MC made rules for the issuing banks that after 2 or 3 chargebacks in the course of a year you had to get a new card, NOONE WOULD DO IT. Amazing, no?
One thing that has always mystified me...if you are disputing a charge you are essentially saying 'someone other than me is using my credit card number without my permission'. By not immediately requesting a new card number you are then admitting you are lying, since if someone had your card number would you not, then, want to make sure they couldn't use it again?
I know that errant companies can levy charges on your account for various crap (for example I get TIME magazine now which I never ordered, ditto with Field and Stream, but when I call they credit me back) but a credit is usually the way to solve those. Rarely is there a need for a chargeback.
If VISA and MC made it clear that after a couple of chargebacks you will be issued a new card, it would save merchants a lot of headache. A merchant rep once fax'ed us a copy of the disputing cardholder's monthly statement since they had it on file. Out of 28 or so charges, 20 of the charges had been reversed. They were all porn sites. The other charges (Walmart, etc) were left intact. TWENTY charges disputed. When we spoke to the card issuing bank the rep said 'oh he wouldn't join a porn site, he's a good boy'.
I shit you not.
Rather than implementing crazy fraud procedures or fining merchants millions, VISA could simply regulate the number of chargebacks allowed on any given card. That'd save them billions a year, and save us major headaches. I still think upgrading their systems is in order, but if you're looking for a quick fix, there you go.
Maybe Kimmy or someone can fill us in, I wonder what % of cardholders generate the majority of the chargebacks? I'd wager it's 20-30% of cardholders generating 80-90% of disputes.
- Titus
|