|
maximus... you are correct, the problem is out of control. like you said, you estimate 83% of chargebacks are actually valid charges. now what about the other 17%? if we stop doing chargebacks for mcc 5967 et al, what happens to the 17% who were wrongly charged? they get shafted with the bill anyways? unfortunately, as long as customers are going to be dishonest, someone will get screwed. have you tried taking your chargebacks to arbitration, with logs/sign-up forms and all?
as for the verified by visa system... yes, that should help a lot, provided merchants choose to accept it. a lot of merchant worry addind an extra step will cause them to lose sales. the system is still in testing with a handful of merchants, but we will hopefully see something soon. as for chargebacks on rebils using Verified by Visa, we can apply the same clause that holds true with debit cards. if a transaction is done using your pin#, you're held responsible. when someone calls to dispute a charge saying it's not theirs, we look back at their account and see whether or not there are other charges from the merchant
so i look back on joe blow's account and i see he's already been charged by ccBill. He's obviously responsible for that charge as his pin was used. so i ask him if he has proof he cancelled the account within the proper time frame. if he cannot provide thise proof, he must pay for the charge.
what's valid proof to me? a confirmation number issued by the processor (i don't know if this is done) as we can check it with the processor. or a registered letter sent to the processor. or a cancellation confirmation letter sent by the processor.
personally, i'm pushing hard within my bank to reduce chargebacks on 3rd party processor charges by educating my co-workers on how they work.
btw, there's one thing you guys seem to forget, or that you don't know. a chargeback costs Visa as well. every chargeback we do costs us $25 cdn. also, the affidavit isn't sent immediately. the cardholder must first fax/mail us a dispute letter.
|