Talk:Chargeback

message: Please discuss proposed edits here, and keep in mind Wiki  Conflict of interest rules.
The following contribution accurately and succinctly describes the flow of all monies involved in a chargeback.  If you propose to remove it, do so only with legitimate evidence, and only if you're not employed/involved in the banking/credit industry.
Honest customers foot the bill for all fraud. Merchants understand the percentage of fraud that takes place, and increase their prices to cover this cost.
Banks and credit card companies profit from fraud. They retain their fees and commissions from the fraud itself, they levy fees for each chargeback, they make commissions (twice) if currency conversions are involved, they "hold" merchant remittance for 30 to 90 days to cover possible fraud (and profit from short term investment of this), and they usually increase the commissions they charge on all transactions to any business they consider "risky", and any who suffer unusually large numbers of chargebacks. Finally, banks also profit from the increased prices merchants charge to cover fraud. In many cases, banks make 300% more profit from a fraud, than they do from a legitimate transaction.
203.206.137.129 (talk) 14:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The merchant bears all of the brunt of a chargeback. If the merchant is unable to repay the chargeback (out of business, account closed) the acquiring bank must pay back the chargeback. This should be added to the article. John Conde 23:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable Undos 

message: Chargeback is also used to describe a Data Center or IT Department charging other departments and/or users for computer time/loads. 
examples
http://whitepapers.techrepublic.com.com/whitepaper.aspx?docid=104886
http://www.virtual-strategy.com/en/roundtable-002
http://www.dmreview.com/article_sub.cfm?articleId=1048525
How does this addition get added?
there is another source that I find useful information for charge backs on financial industry
I edited the page based on what learned here:
https://internationalpaymentsolutions.ca/2020/04/11/what-does-chargeback-on-credit-card-mean/
=== Partial answer ===
This is a very good point. I was actually looking for "showback", couldn't find it, then looked for "chargeback" and was surprised to see no reference to the IT sense. I therefore just created a page called IT Chargeback and Showback and added a line at the top of the Chargeback page to link interested readers to it.
In principle, it would be better to rename this page to something like "Merchant Chargeback" and then create a new disambiguation page, called "Chargeback", which would direct the reader to either "Merchant Chargeback" or to IT Chargeback and Showback.
Claude (talk) 22:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chargeback definition is incomplete 

message: This is a very good point. I was actually looking for "showback", couldn't find it, then looked for "chargeback" and was surprised to see no reference to the IT sense. I therefore just created a page called IT Chargeback and Showback and added a line at the top of the Chargeback page to link interested readers to it.
In principle, it would be better to rename this page to something like "Merchant Chargeback" and then create a new disambiguation page, called "Chargeback", which would direct the reader to either "Merchant Chargeback" or to IT Chargeback and Showback.
Claude (talk) 22:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partial answer 

message: Hi, I've read the article, it's not clear to me, do the merchants pay chargeback fee, like they would pay if a check bounces on them to their bank? Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.68.36.136 (talk) 06:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question. 

message: Article does need references.  I am correcting some false information, but really it should all be referenced. I also made a stupid comment in an edit summary here and nevermind what I said as it needs better references than what I suggested. William Ortiz (talk) 16:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  references  

message: Is buyer's remorse really a valid reason for a charge back? This seems unlikely. Removed until someone can verify. --24.8.146.220 (talk) 19:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buyer's Remorse? 

message: I took some time to: 1) reorganize the material in the article, 2) generalize it such that it applies to ach, card, and other forms of payment, 3) eliminate unreferenced details, 4) eliminate unneeded detail (eg, list of reason codes), and 5) add context that addresses the origins, and the pros and cons of the chargeback system.  The result was a rather major edit.  Hopefully everyone will find it now reads with a greater degree of clarity.  --Tim Barber (talk) 01:44, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major revision 

message: I think the article provides a misrepresentation to the chargeback itself. It is not a reversal of funds as that does not occure every time. Please refer to http://www.chargebackcodes.com/Chargeback where by they simply put it as a challenge transaction. So much of the article does not provide a clear understand that a chargeback is not taking back the funds but an attempt to take back the funds.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.249.200.34 (talk) 03:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misrepresentation 

message: Livit⇑Eh?/What? 17:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyedit 

message: The reference to the paypal chargeback fees should be completely removed. A chargeback is specifically in reference to an issued credit or debit card. Paypal uses an internal dispute system, and while a person may request a chargeback with their issuer if they made a Paypal purchase with a credit card, it's not a chargeback within the paypal system. Maybe a see also to Paypal, but it's misleading.  Jestep (talk) 16:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paypal chargeback section 

message: I feel this article only represents the US and UK, while chargebacks are common in many countries (even if they're called otherwise). I've added the issue template. ctxppc (talk) 12:30, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true, an international view may be useful. In some countries like Canada, it's very similar to US for Visa, Mastercard and American express credit cards (for debit cards like "Interac", it's a little more complicated although a volontary code provides some help). But for other countries, it may differ a lot, for example in France (and probably in a lot of European Union countries), chargeback equivalent is provided in case of Internet fraud, and more or less provided when the customer didn't know the exact amount at the time of authorizing a transaction (provided the transaction amount is different from what he could reasonnably expect), and also provided although rarely used in some cases of merchant bankptrucy. No chargeback in France if you don't receive what was expected ! In some countries of the world, even in case of fraud chargeback or equivalent does not seem a right, for example with Société Générale operating in Côte d'Ivoire through the name SGBCI, in case of fraud cardholder is fully responsible ("En cas de transaction Internet frauduleuse, la responsabilité de la banque ne sera pas engagée et le porteur de la carte devra en assumer seul les conséquences financières"). TramwaySuspendu (talk) 21:19, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Globalise