Chargeback Reason Code Reference

Chip Liability Shift

• The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging that the transaction was fraudulent.
• Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in a country or region that has adopted a domestic or intraregional chip liability shift, or that participates in the Global Chip Liability Shift Program for interregional transactions as shown in the below tables.
• The transaction was conducted with a counterfeit card at a magnetic stripe reading-only ATM or POS terminal.
• The validly issued card was a hybrid card.
• The fraudulent transaction must be reported to the Fraud and Loss Database on or before the date the chargeback is processed.""

Failed Travel Merchant Intra-EEA and Domestic European Transactions Only

This chargeback takes precedence for Intra-EEA and domestic European Transactions, when the cardholder contacted the issuer claiming a travel service has not, or will not, be provided, and when the merchant is seeking protection from creditors, insolvent, bankrupt or in liquidation, at least one of the following conditions must be met prior to the issuer raising a chargeback:
1. The travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, and one of the following:
– The cardholder (or traveler) requested reimbursement from the bonding authority or similar scheme and did not receive reimbursement, or the claim was declined.
– The merchant, bonding authority or similar scheme (including an insolvency practitioner) stated cardholders (or travelers) should contact their issuer for reimbursement and/or the bond is insufficient. For sake of clarity, the statement can either be a public statement such as on a website, advertisement, or similar, as well as direct communication with the cardholder (or traveler).
– For Swedish domestic transactions: no additional requirement. The cardholder (or traveler) is not obligated to request reimbursement from a bonding authority or similar scheme.
2. The travel service was not covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, or neither the issuer nor cardholder after reasonable effort can determine whether the travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law

Account Listed in Payment Cancellation Service (PCS)

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder notified the merchant to cancel the recurring transaction and the merchant continued to bill the cardholder.
• The cardholder was not aware that the cardholder was agreeing to a recurring transaction

Lost, Stolen, or Never Received Fraud

• The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging that the transaction was fraudulent.
• Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in a country or region that has adopted a domestic or intraregional chip liability shift, or that participates in the Global Chip Liability Shift Program for interregional transactions as shown in the below tables.
• The transaction was conducted at a magnetic stripe reading-only POS terminal without PIN as CVM.
• The transaction was conducted with a hybrid card.
• The fraudulent transaction must be reported to the Fraud and Loss Database on or before the date the chargeback is processed

Improper Merchant Surcharge (intra-European and inter-European transactions only)

An improper merchant surcharge was applied to the total transaction amount.

10.1

EMV Liability Shift Counterfeit Fraud

Why did I get this notification? A cardholder is claiming that they did not authorize or participate in a transaction that you processed on a counterfeit card. The cardholder’s bank determined all of the following has occurred:
– The transaction was completed in a card-present environment with a card that was reported as counterfeit,
– The transaction qualifies for the EMV liability shift,
– The card is a chip card, and
– Either of these things occurred:
– The transaction did not take place at a chip-reading device (terminal entry capability code was not 5).
– The transaction was chip-initiated and, the transaction was authorized online, however, the card processor did not transmit the full chip data to Visa in the authorization request.

10.2

EMV Liability Shift Non-Counterfeit Fraud

Why did I get this notification? A cardholder is claiming that they did not authorize or participate in a transaction that you processed on a lost or stolen card, or on a card not received as issued (NRI). The cardholder’s bank determined all of the following has occurred:
– The transaction was completed in a card-present environment with a card that was reported lost, stolen, or card not received as issued (NRI)
– The transaction qualifies for the EMV liability shift,
– The card is a PIN-preferring chip card, and
– One of these actions transpired:
– The transaction did not take place at a chip-reading device.
– A chip-initiated transaction took place at a chip-reading device that was not EMV PIN-compliant.
– The online authorized transaction was chip-initiated without an online PIN and the card processor did not transmit the full chip data to Visa in the authorization request.

10.3

Other Fraud – Card-Present Environment

Why did I get this notification? A cardholder is claiming that they did not authorize or participate in a key-entered transaction conducted in a card-present environment.

10.4

Other Fraud – Card-Absent Environment

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder is claiming that they did not authorize or participate in a transaction conducted in a card-absent environment (i.e., internet, mail-order, phone-order, etc.).

10.5

Visa Fraud Monitoring Program

Why did I get this notification? Visa notified the cardholder’s bank that the Visa Fraud Monitoring Program (VFMP) identified the transaction and the cardholder’s bank has not successfully disputed the transaction under another dispute condition.

11.1

Card Recovery Bulletin

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder’s bank determined that both of these occurred:
– There was no authorization obtained on the transaction date, and
– The payment credential was listed in the Card Recovery Bulletin for the Visa region in which you are located.

11.2

Declined Authorization

Why did I get this notification? A transaction was processed after receiving a Decline or Pickup response.

11.3

No Authorization/Late Presentment Effective for Transactions completed on or after 13 April 2024

Why did I get this notification? A transaction was processed without obtaining the required authorization, or the transaction was not processed within the required transaction processing time limit.

12

Transit First Ride Risk (FRR) Claims

1. The original transit transaction declined by the issuer was not a properly identified contactless transit aggregated transaction.
2. The issuer declined the original contactless transit aggregated transaction or a subsequent transit debt recovery transaction using a DE 39 (Response Code) value categorized as “Not Claimable”.
3. The acquirer or merchant did not fulfill the criteria for submitting an FRR claim transaction. For example, the merchant submits an ineligible FRR claim to a non-domestic issuer, or did not initiate at least nine transit debt recovery attempts in the 45-calendar day period following the issuer’s decline of the contactless transit aggregated transaction, or the issuer approved a transit debit recovery transaction.
4. The FRR claim transaction exceeded the FRR limit amount applicable in the merchant’s country, as specified in Chapter 5 of the Quick Reference Booklet.
5. The acquirer previously submitted an FRR claim transaction for the same debt.

12.1

Late Presentment Effective through 12 April 2024

Why did I get this notification? The transaction was completed past the required transaction processing time limits.

12.2

Incorrect Transaction Code

Why did I get this notification? The transaction was completed with an incorrect transaction code (i.e., you meant to send acredit, but you actually sent a sale, and vice versa or a credit refund was processed instead of areversal or an adjustment).

12.3

Incorrect Currency

Why did I get this notification? The transaction was processed with an incorrect currency code (i.e., the transaction currency is different from the currency transmitted through Visa; or the cardholder was not advised or did not agree that Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) would occur).

12.4

Incorrect Account Number

Why did I get this notification? The transaction was processed using an incorrect payment credential.

12.5

Incorrect Amount

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder submitted a claim to their bank that says one of the following things happened:
– The transaction amount is incorrect.
– An addition or transposition error was made when calculating the transaction amount.
– You altered the transaction amount after the transaction was completed without the consent of the cardholder.

12.6

Duplicate Processing

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder claims that a single transaction was processed more than once using the same Payment Credential on the same Transaction date, and for the same Transaction amount.

12.7

Invalid Data

Why did I get this notification? An authorization was obtained using invalid or incorrect data.

13

Merchant Credit Correcting Error Resulting in Cardholder Currency Exchange Loss

The merchant processed a credit (instead of a reversal) to correct an error which resulted in the cardholder experiencing a currency exchange loss.

13.1

Merchandise/Services Not Received

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder claims that merchandise or services that they ordered were not received by the expected date (or merchandise was unavailable for pick-up).

13.2

Cancelled Recurring Transaction

Why did I get this notification? The Cardholder withdrew permission to charge the account for a recurring transaction or you or your card processor received notification that, before the Transaction was processed, that the cardholder’s account was closed.

13.3

Not as Described or Defective Merchandise/Services

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder is claiming that the merchandise or services were one or more of these:
– Merchandise or services did not match the description on the transaction receipt or other documentation presented at the time of purchase.
– Merchandise or services are not the same as your verbal description (for a telephone transaction5).
– The merchandise was received damaged or defective.
– For travel agency merchant using a Visa Commercial Card Virtual Account that has failed to honor the contractual agreement or the services provided by the travel agency merchant to the Virtual Account holder were not as described in the contractual agreement.
– The cardholder disputes the quality of the merchandise or services.

13.4

Counterfeit Merchandise

Why did I get this notification? The merchandise was identified as counterfeit by the owner of the intellectual property or authorized representative, a customs agency, law enforcement agency, other governmental agency, or a neutral third-party expert.

13.5

Misrepresentation

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder is claiming that the terms of sale were misrepresented

13.6

Credit Not Processed

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder is claiming that they received a credit or voided transaction receipt that has not been processed.

13.7

Cancelled Merchandise/Services

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder is claiming that they returned merchandise or cancelled services, but the credit has not appeared on the cardholder’s Visa statement.

13.8

Original Credit Transaction Not Accepted

Why did I get this notification? The original credit was not accepted.

13.9

Non-Receipt of Cash at an ATM

Why did I get this notification? The cardholder is claiming that they participated in the transaction, but did not receive cash or received a partial amount at the ATM.

17

Cash Dispute-ATM Only

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging that some or all of the funds debited from the cardholder’s account as the result of an ATM withdrawal were not dispensed.

30

Cardholder Disputed Amount (Reason Code 30)

The issuer is disputing the acquirer’s adjustment of a Shared Deposit as invalid. The acquirer must have submitted the adjustment six or more calendar days after the original transaction settlement date.

31

Transaction Amount Differs

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed an incorrect amount.

31

Cardholder Debited More than Once for the Same Goods or Services

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.
• The cardholder paid for a transaction using one form of payment and was subsequently debited for the same transaction using another form of payment.

34

Charges for Loss, Theft, or Damages

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed for loss, theft, or damage in the same transaction as the underlying initial service.

34

Charges for Loss, Theft, or Damages

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed for loss, theft, or damage in the same transaction as the underlying initial service.

34

Cardholder Debited More than Once for the Same Goods or Services

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.
• The cardholder paid for a transaction using one form of payment and was subsequently debited for the same transaction using another form of payment.

34

Transaction Amount Differs

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed an incorrect amount.

34

Currency Errors

1. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) was performed and the cardholder stated that the cardholder did not consent to the POI Currency Conversion. Examples include but are not limited to: a. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS in the local currency. The transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. b. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS both in local currency and the cardholder currency. The cardholder chooses local currency; however, the transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) requirements are described in the Transaction Processing Rules,
3.8 POI Currency Conversion.
2. Currency conversion was performed incorrectly resulting in an incorrect amount being deducted from the cardholder’s account as described below:
– Goods/services were priced in the cardholder's currency, the cardholder agreed to be billed in that currency, but the transaction was processed in a different currency. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Euro. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Mexican Pesos. This chargeback is not available when the cardholder’s currency was displayed for information purposes only. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos and also displayed the amount in Euros for informational purposes. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Pesos.
– The transaction was processed in the incorrect currency. For example:
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation for 24,000 Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed for 24,000 Euros.
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in U.S. Dollars.

34

Cardholder Debited More than Once for the Same Goods or Services

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.
• The cardholder paid for a transaction using one form of payment and was subsequently debited for the same transaction using another form of payment.

34

Merchant Credit Correcting Error Resulting in Cardholder Currency Exchange Loss

The merchant processed a credit (instead of a reversal) to correct an error which resulted in the cardholder experiencing a currency exchange loss.

34

ATM Disputes

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging one of the following:
• Some or all of the funds debited from the cardholder’s account as the result of an ATM withdrawal were not dispensed.
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.

37

No Cardholder Authorization

• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The transaction was reported to the Risk Management as fraud in accordance with the China Switch User Guide - Customer Portal on or before the date of the chargeback. For all other transactions: The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as fraud in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide on or before the date of the chargeback.

37

No Cardholder Authorization

Both of the following:
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as fraud in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide on or before the date of the chargeback.

41

Digital Goods Purchase of USD 25 or Less

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging both of the following:
• Digital goods were purchased in an e-commerce transaction that was less than or equal to USD 25 (or the local currency equivalent).
• The merchant did not offer the cardholder purchase control settings. In addition, all of the following:
• The cardholder's account is not closed.
• The cardholder's account is in good standing with no associated fraudulent transactions.
• The issuer must determine, based on a challenge of the cardholder, that prior to the date(s) of the disputed transaction(s), the cardholder had provided card information to the merchant in order to establish an account that could be used for future digital goods purchases, but the merchant did not offer or establish the following minimum purchase controls in connection with the use of that account:
– The option, enabled as a default setting, for the cardholder to disable all digital goods purchases;
– The time period during which a digital goods purchase can be made on the cardholder’s account with the merchant (the “account open” period) must not exceed 15 minutes from the time at which the cardholder enters account authentication credentials; and
– Allowing the cardholder to confirm or to cancel the clearly displayed total transaction amount of each pending digital goods purchase before completion of the transaction. The issuer is advised to ask the following questions when challenging the cardholder and to educate the cardholder on the use of purchase control settings:
1. Was the cardholder given the option to disable all digital goods purchases on the account?
2. Did the cardholder agree (such as by checking a box) to permit digital goods purchases to be made without the entry of a password or other form of authentication?
3. When the cardholder was required to enter authentication credentials to use the account, was the cardholder prompted to re-enter the credentials after a period of inactivity? When known, did that period exceed 15 minutes?
4. Did the merchant site afford the cardholder the option to confirm or to cancel each purchase?
5. Did the cardholder receive notification (such as using email, text, or other means) promptly after each purchase was completed?

41

Issuer Dispute of a Recurring Transaction

For Mainland China domestic transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
2. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring. For all other transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer listed the account in the Payment Cancellation Service (PCS) prior to the disputed transaction occurring.
2. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
3. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring

46

Currency Errors

1. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) was performed and the cardholder stated that the cardholder did not consent to the POI Currency Conversion. Examples include but are not limited to: a. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS in the local currency. The transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. b. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS both in local currency and the cardholder currency. The cardholder chooses local currency; however, the transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) requirements are described in the Transaction Processing Rules,
3.8 POI Currency Conversion.
2. Currency conversion was performed incorrectly resulting in an incorrect amount being deducted from the cardholder’s account as described below:
– Goods/services were priced in the cardholder's currency, the cardholder agreed to be billed in that currency, but the transaction was processed in a different currency. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Euro. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Mexican Pesos. This chargeback is not available when the cardholder’s currency was displayed for information purposes only. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos and also displayed the amount in Euros for informational purposes. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Pesos.
– The transaction was processed in the incorrect currency. For example:
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation for 24,000 Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed for 24,000 Euros.
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in U.S. Dollars.

4807

CAT 3 Device

1. The transaction was not identified with one of the following MCCs: a. 4784-Bridges and Road Fees, Tolls b. 5499-Miscellaneous Food Stores-Convenience Stores, Markets, Specialty Stores (solely for Contactless-only Transactions) c. 7523-Automobile Parking Lots and Garages d. 7542-Car Washes
2. The transaction was identified with one of the above MCCs and the transaction amount was greater than one of the following: a. The CVM Limit as published in Appendix C (CVM and Transit Limit Amounts) for contactless- only CAT 3 devices b. HKD 500 for domestic Hong Kong SAR CAT 3 transactions identified with MCC 7523 (Automobile Parking Lots and Garages) c. EUR 50 for CAT 3 transaction occurring in Europe d. USD 40, or its local currency equivalent, for all other CAT 3 transactions
3. The transaction was a magnetic stripe transaction identified with one of the MCCs listed in bullet
1.
4. The PAN was listed in the applicable Local Stoplist or Electronic Warning Bulletin File on the date of the transaction.
5. The PAN was expired or not yet valid.
6. The transaction occurred in the Europe region with a card that had a service code of X2X (Positive Online Authorization Required).

4807

Required Authorization Not Obtained

• Authorization was required.
• Authorization was not properly obtained.

4807

Expired Chargeback Protection Period

• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in the Europe region and the issuer permanently closed the account before processing the chargeback.
• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in any other region and the issuer deems the account not to be in good standing (a “statused” account) before processing the chargeback. And one of the following:
• The authorization was identified as a preauthorization (DE 61 [Point-of-Service (POS) Data], subfield 7 (POS Transaction Status) contains a value of 4 [Preauthorized request]) and the transaction was presented or completed in more than:
– For India domestic transactions: 4-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
– For all other transactions: 30-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
• The authorization was not identified as a preauthorization and the transaction was presented more than seven-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• The authorization was identified as a Payment Transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than one-calendar day after the authorization approval date. Refer to Appendix E for Payment Transaction transaction identification requirements.
• The authorization was identified as a contactless transit aggregated transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than 14-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• A refund transaction was presented in clearing more than five-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day six). For a refund transaction, the transaction date is the date on which the merchant agreed to provide a refund to the cardholder (the refund transaction receipt date, or if the refund transaction was authorized by the issuer, then the refund transaction authorization date).
• An offline chip-approved purchase transaction or other transaction not requiring online authorization by the issuer was presented in clearing more than seven-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day eight). This chargeback is not available for properly identified acquirer-financed or merchant-financed preauthorized installment billing payments or transit debt recovery transactions.

4807

Multiple Authorization Requests

A Card-Not-Present authorization was declined by the issuer and subsequently approved in Stand-In or X-Code

4808

Required Authorization Not Obtained

• Authorization was required.
• Authorization was not properly obtained.

4808

CAT 3 Device

1. The transaction was not identified with one of the following MCCs: a. 4784-Bridges and Road Fees, Tolls b. 5499-Miscellaneous Food Stores-Convenience Stores, Markets, Specialty Stores (solely for Contactless-only Transactions) c. 7523-Automobile Parking Lots and Garages d. 7542-Car Washes
2. The transaction was identified with one of the above MCCs and the transaction amount was greater than one of the following: a. The CVM Limit as published in Appendix C (CVM and Transit Limit Amounts) for contactless- only CAT 3 devices b. HKD 500 for domestic Hong Kong SAR CAT 3 transactions identified with MCC 7523 (Automobile Parking Lots and Garages) c. EUR 50 for CAT 3 transaction occurring in Europe d. USD 40, or its local currency equivalent, for all other CAT 3 transactions
3. The transaction was a magnetic stripe transaction identified with one of the MCCs listed in bullet
1.
4. The PAN was listed in the applicable Local Stoplist or Electronic Warning Bulletin File on the date of the transaction.
5. The PAN was expired or not yet valid.
6. The transaction occurred in the Europe region with a card that had a service code of X2X (Positive Online Authorization Required).

4808

Transit First Ride Risk (FRR) Claims

1. The original transit transaction declined by the issuer was not a properly identified contactless transit aggregated transaction.
2. The issuer declined the original contactless transit aggregated transaction or a subsequent transit debt recovery transaction using a DE 39 (Response Code) value categorized as “Not Claimable”.
3. The acquirer or merchant did not fulfill the criteria for submitting an FRR claim transaction. For example, the merchant submits an ineligible FRR claim to a non-domestic issuer, or did not initiate at least nine transit debt recovery attempts in the 45-calendar day period following the issuer’s decline of the contactless transit aggregated transaction, or the issuer approved a transit debit recovery transaction.
4. The FRR claim transaction exceeded the FRR limit amount applicable in the merchant’s country, as specified in Chapter 5 of the Quick Reference Booklet.
5. The acquirer previously submitted an FRR claim transaction for the same debt.

4808

Multiple Authorization Requests

A Card-Not-Present authorization was declined by the issuer and subsequently approved in Stand-In or X-Code

4808

Expired Chargeback Protection Period

• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in the Europe region and the issuer permanently closed the account before processing the chargeback.
• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in any other region and the issuer deems the account not to be in good standing (a “statused” account) before processing the chargeback. And one of the following:
• The authorization was identified as a preauthorization (DE 61 [Point-of-Service (POS) Data], subfield 7 (POS Transaction Status) contains a value of 4 [Preauthorized request]) and the transaction was presented or completed in more than:
– For India domestic transactions: 4-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
– For all other transactions: 30-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
• The authorization was not identified as a preauthorization and the transaction was presented more than seven-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• The authorization was identified as a Payment Transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than one-calendar day after the authorization approval date. Refer to Appendix E for Payment Transaction transaction identification requirements.
• The authorization was identified as a contactless transit aggregated transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than 14-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• A refund transaction was presented in clearing more than five-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day six). For a refund transaction, the transaction date is the date on which the merchant agreed to provide a refund to the cardholder (the refund transaction receipt date, or if the refund transaction was authorized by the issuer, then the refund transaction authorization date).
• An offline chip-approved purchase transaction or other transaction not requiring online authorization by the issuer was presented in clearing more than seven-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day eight). This chargeback is not available for properly identified acquirer-financed or merchant-financed preauthorized installment billing payments or transit debt recovery transactions.

4812

Transit First Ride Risk (FRR) Claims

1. The original transit transaction declined by the issuer was not a properly identified contactless transit aggregated transaction.
2. The issuer declined the original contactless transit aggregated transaction or a subsequent transit debt recovery transaction using a DE 39 (Response Code) value categorized as “Not Claimable”.
3. The acquirer or merchant did not fulfill the criteria for submitting an FRR claim transaction. For example, the merchant submits an ineligible FRR claim to a non-domestic issuer, or did not initiate at least nine transit debt recovery attempts in the 45-calendar day period following the issuer’s decline of the contactless transit aggregated transaction, or the issuer approved a transit debit recovery transaction.
4. The FRR claim transaction exceeded the FRR limit amount applicable in the merchant’s country, as specified in Chapter 5 of the Quick Reference Booklet.
5. The acquirer previously submitted an FRR claim transaction for the same debt.

4831

Cardholder Debited More than Once for the Same Goods or Services

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.
• The cardholder paid for a transaction using one form of payment and was subsequently debited for the same transaction using another form of payment.

4831

Transaction Amount Differs

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed an incorrect amount.

4831

Merchant Credit Correcting Error Resulting in Cardholder Currency Exchange Loss

The merchant processed a credit (instead of a reversal) to correct an error which resulted in the cardholder experiencing a currency exchange loss.

4834

Unreasonable Amount (EEA, Gibraltar, United Kingdom)

• The card was issued in the EEA, Gibraltar, or the United Kingdom.
• The merchant was located in the EEA, Gibraltar, or the United Kingdom.
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the transaction amount was unreasonable.
• The exact transaction amount was not specified at the time the cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• PIN or CDCVM was not used.
• The transaction amount exceeded what the cardholder could reasonably have expected, taking into account the cardholder’s previous spending pattern, the conditions of the cardholder agreement and the relevant circumstances of the case.

4834

Transaction Amount Differs

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed an incorrect amount.

4834

Merchant Credit Correcting Error Resulting in Cardholder Currency Exchange Loss

The merchant processed a credit (instead of a reversal) to correct an error which resulted in the cardholder experiencing a currency exchange loss.

4834

Charges for Loss, Theft, or Damages

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed for loss, theft, or damage in the same transaction as the underlying initial service.

4834

Message Reason Code 4846-Currency Errors

This reason code may be used only for intra-European and inter-European transactions when point-of-interaction (POI) currency conversion was applied in the following circumstances: One of the following:
1. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) was performed and the cardholder states that the cardholder did not consent to POI Currency Conversion. Examples include but are not limited to: a. The transaction amount is displayed at the ATM in the local currency. The transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. b. The transaction amount is displayed at the ATM both in local currency and the cardholder currency. The cardholder chooses local currency; however, the transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) requirements are described in the Transaction Processing Rules,
3.8 POI Currency Conversion.
2. Currency conversion was performed incorrectly resulting in an incorrect amount being deducted from the cardholder’s account as described below:
– Cash was dispensed in the cardholder's currency, the cardholder agreed to be billed in that currency, but the transaction was processed in a different currency. For example: An ATM located in Mexico dispensed the cash in Euro. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Mexican Pesos. This chargeback is not available when the cardholder’s currency was displayed for information purposes only. For example: An ATM located in Mexico displayed the withdrawal amount in Pesos and also displayed the amount in Euros for informational purposes. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Pesos.
– The transaction was processed in the incorrect currency. For example:
– An ATM located in Mexico displayed the withdrawal amount as 24,000 Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed for 24,000 Euros.
– An ATM located in Mexico displayed the withdrawal amount in Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in U.S. Dollars.

4834

ATM Disputes

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging one of the following:
• Some or all of the funds debited from the cardholder’s account as the result of an ATM withdrawal were not dispensed.
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.

4834

Cardholder Debited More than Once for the Same Goods or Services

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.
• The cardholder paid for a transaction using one form of payment and was subsequently debited for the same transaction using another form of payment.

4834

Currency Errors

1. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) was performed and the cardholder stated that the cardholder did not consent to the POI Currency Conversion. Examples include but are not limited to: a. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS in the local currency. The transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. b. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS both in local currency and the cardholder currency. The cardholder chooses local currency; however, the transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) requirements are described in the Transaction Processing Rules,
3.8 POI Currency Conversion.
2. Currency conversion was performed incorrectly resulting in an incorrect amount being deducted from the cardholder’s account as described below:
– Goods/services were priced in the cardholder's currency, the cardholder agreed to be billed in that currency, but the transaction was processed in a different currency. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Euro. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Mexican Pesos. This chargeback is not available when the cardholder’s currency was displayed for information purposes only. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos and also displayed the amount in Euros for informational purposes. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Pesos.
– The transaction was processed in the incorrect currency. For example:
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation for 24,000 Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed for 24,000 Euros.
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in U.S. Dollars.

4834

Improper Merchant Surcharge (Select Countries only)

• An improper merchant surcharge was applied to the total transaction amount.
• The transaction was one of the following:
– A Canada domestic transaction.
– An Intra-European and Inter-European transaction.

4837

No Cardholder Authorization

• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The transaction was reported to the Risk Management as fraud in accordance with the China Switch User Guide - Customer Portal on or before the date of the chargeback. For all other transactions: The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as fraud in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide on or before the date of the chargeback.

4841

Issuer Dispute of a Recurring Transaction

For Mainland China domestic transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
2. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring. For all other transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer listed the account in the Payment Cancellation Service (PCS) prior to the disputed transaction occurring.
2. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
3. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring

4841

Digital Goods Purchase of USD 25 or Less

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging both of the following:
• Digital goods were purchased in an e-commerce transaction that was less than or equal to USD 25 (or the local currency equivalent).
• The merchant did not offer the cardholder purchase control settings. In addition, all of the following:
• The cardholder's account is not closed.
• The cardholder's account is in good standing with no associated fraudulent transactions.
• The issuer must determine, based on a challenge of the cardholder, that prior to the date(s) of the disputed transaction(s), the cardholder had provided card information to the merchant in order to establish an account that could be used for future digital goods purchases, but the merchant did not offer or establish the following minimum purchase controls in connection with the use of that account:
– The option, enabled as a default setting, for the cardholder to disable all digital goods purchases;
– The time period during which a digital goods purchase can be made on the cardholder’s account with the merchant (the “account open” period) must not exceed 15 minutes from the time at which the cardholder enters account authentication credentials; and
– Allowing the cardholder to confirm or to cancel the clearly displayed total transaction amount of each pending digital goods purchase before completion of the transaction. The issuer is advised to ask the following questions when challenging the cardholder and to educate the cardholder on the use of purchase control settings:
1. Was the cardholder given the option to disable all digital goods purchases on the account?
2. Did the cardholder agree (such as by checking a box) to permit digital goods purchases to be made without the entry of a password or other form of authentication?
3. When the cardholder was required to enter authentication credentials to use the account, was the cardholder prompted to re-enter the credentials after a period of inactivity? When known, did that period exceed 15 minutes?
4. Did the merchant site afford the cardholder the option to confirm or to cancel each purchase?
5. Did the cardholder receive notification (such as using email, text, or other means) promptly after each purchase was completed?

4841

Digital Goods

• Digital goods were purchased in an e-commerce transaction that was less than or equal to EUR 25 (or local currency equivalent)
• The merchant did not offer the cardholder purchase control settings.
• The cardholder’s account is not closed and is in good standing with no associated fraudulent transactions

4846

Currency Errors

1. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) was performed and the cardholder stated that the cardholder did not consent to the POI Currency Conversion. Examples include but are not limited to: a. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS in the local currency. The transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. b. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS both in local currency and the cardholder currency. The cardholder chooses local currency; however, the transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) requirements are described in the Transaction Processing Rules,
3.8 POI Currency Conversion.
2. Currency conversion was performed incorrectly resulting in an incorrect amount being deducted from the cardholder’s account as described below:
– Goods/services were priced in the cardholder's currency, the cardholder agreed to be billed in that currency, but the transaction was processed in a different currency. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Euro. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Mexican Pesos. This chargeback is not available when the cardholder’s currency was displayed for information purposes only. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos and also displayed the amount in Euros for informational purposes. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Pesos.
– The transaction was processed in the incorrect currency. For example:
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation for 24,000 Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed for 24,000 Euros.
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in U.S. Dollars.

4846

Intra-European Message Reason Code 4846-Currency Errors

1. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) was performed and the cardholder states that the cardholder did not consent to POI Currency Conversion. Examples include but are not limited to: a. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS in the local currency. The transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. b. The transaction amount is displayed at the POS both in local currency and the cardholder currency. The cardholder chooses local currency; however, the transaction is performed in the cardholder’s currency. POI Currency Conversion (Dynamic Currency Conversion) requirements are described in the Transaction Processing Rules,
3.8 POI Currency Conversion.
2. Currency conversion was performed incorrectly resulting in an incorrect amount being deducted from the cardholder’s account as described below.
– Goods/services were priced in the cardholder's currency, the cardholder agreed to be billed in that currency, but the transaction was processed in a different currency. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Euro. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Mexican Pesos. This chargeback is not available when the cardholder’s currency was displayed for information purposes only. For example: A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos and also displayed the amount in Euros for informational purposes. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in Pesos.
– The transaction was processed in the incorrect currency. For example:
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation for 24,000 Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed for 24,000 Euros.
– A merchant located in Mexico quoted the hotel reservation in Pesos. The cardholder’s currency is Euros. The transaction was performed in U.S. Dollars.

4849

Questionable Merchant Audit Program (QMAP)

• The acquirer name, acquirer ID, merchant name, and merchant location are listed in a Mastercard Announcement under the QMAP.
• Each transaction charged back must have occurred during the published chargeback period.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Risk Management. For all other transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Fraud and Loss Database. All fraud type codes are eligible.

4849

Coercion Program

The transaction was identified by Mastercard, in writing, as eligible for chargeback due to a substantiated claim of coercion

4853

Transaction Did Not Complete

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims the disputed transaction failed to complete.
• The cardholder did not use the goods or services.

4853

Goods or Services Not Provided

• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received.
• Travel services arranged through an online travel agency or tour operator were not received and the travel agency or tour operator is no longer in business.

4853

Travel/Entertainment Services Cancelled/Returned and Credit Not Processed

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The merchant agreed to provide a refund and failed to process that refund.
• The merchant failed to disclose its refund policy at the time of the transaction and is unwilling to accept the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant has not responded to the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant posted a credit for a reduced amount without proper disclosure. In addition, the transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
• Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
• Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
• Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
• Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
• Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
• Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
• Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
• Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
• Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
• Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

4853

Travel/Entertainment Services Not Provided/Not as Described and Merchant Voucher Issued

1. The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received due to merchant cancellation.
– The merchant provided a voucher for future use in lieu of a refund and that provision of voucher was properly disclosed in the merchant’s terms and conditions.
– The merchant is unable or unwilling to honor the voucher in violation of the voucher terms and conditions.
2. The transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
– Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
– Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
– Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
– Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
– Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
– Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
– Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
– Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
– Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
– Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

4853

Failed Travel Merchant-Intra-EEA and Domestic European Transactions Only

This chargeback takes precedence for Intra-EEA and domestic European transactions, when the cardholder contacted the issuer claiming a travel service has not, or will not, be provided, and the merchant is seeking protection from creditors, insolvent, bankrupt or in liquidation, at least one of the following conditions must be met prior to the issuer raising a chargeback:
1. The travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, and one of the following:
– The cardholder (or traveler) requested reimbursement from the bonding authority or similar scheme and did not receive reimbursement, or the claim was declined.
– The merchant, bonding authority or similar scheme (including an insolvency practitioner) stated cardholders (or travelers) should contact their issuer for reimbursement and/or the bond is insufficient. For sake of clarity, the statement can either be a public statement such as on a website, advertisement, or similar, as well as direct communication with the cardholder (or traveler).
– For Swedish domestic transactions: no additional requirement. The cardholder (or traveler) is not obligated to request reimbursement from a bonding authority or similar scheme.
2. The travel service was not covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, or neither the issuer nor the cardholder after reasonable effort can determine whether the travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law.

4853

Addendum Dispute

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in a valid transaction with the merchant.
• A subsequent transaction occurred with that same merchant without the cardholder’s consent.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute. Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.

4853

Goods or Services Were Either Not as Described or Defective

• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute.
• Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.
• The merchant refused to adjust the price, repair, or replace the goods or other things of value, or issue a credit.
• For disputes involving goods: The cardholder returned the goods or informed the merchant the goods were available for pickup. And one of the following:
• When delivered from the merchant, the goods arrived broken or could not be used for the intended purpose.
• Goods and services did not conform to their description. Examples include, but are not limited to:
– The cardholder claims that the quality or workmanship of the product is not as described.
– The cardholder claims that the specified color, size, or quantity is not as described.
• The merchant did not honor the terms and conditions of the contract with the cardholder including, but not limited to, 100 percent money back guarantee, written promises, or return policy

4853

“No-Show” Hotel Charge

The cardholder contacted the issuer to dispute a “no-show” hotel charge from a merchant that participates in the Mastercard Guaranteed Reservations Service (described in Appendix F of the Transaction Processing Rules) and alleged one of the following:
1. The cardholder canceled the reservation.
2. The cardholder used the accommodations.
3. The merchant provided alternate accommodations. For example, the cardholder arrived at the hotel and no room was available. Although the hotel arranged for accommodations at another hotel, the merchant billed the cardholder in error.
4. The “no-show” charge differed from the rate quoted to the cardholder. Under these circumstances, only the difference between the two charges can be charged back.
5. The merchant did not advise the cardholder that the merchant would charge a “no-show” fee.

4853

Counterfeit Goods

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims that the goods were purported to be genuine, but were counterfeit.

4853

Timeshares

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder canceled the timeshare or similar provision of services within the Mastercard time frame, regardless of the contractual terms.

4853

Credit Posted as a Purchase

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder account has been inaccurately posted with a debit instead of a credit.

4853

Digital Goods Purchase of USD 25 or Less

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging both of the following:
• Digital goods were purchased in an e-commerce transaction that was less than or equal to USD 25 (or the local currency equivalent).
• The merchant did not offer the cardholder purchase control settings. In addition, all of the following:
• The cardholder's account is not closed.
• The cardholder's account is in good standing with no associated fraudulent transactions.
• The issuer must determine, based on a challenge of the cardholder, that prior to the date(s) of the disputed transaction(s), the cardholder had provided card information to the merchant in order to establish an account that could be used for future digital goods purchases, but the merchant did not offer or establish the following minimum purchase controls in connection with the use of that account:
– The option, enabled as a default setting, for the cardholder to disable all digital goods purchases;
– The time period during which a digital goods purchase can be made on the cardholder’s account with the merchant (the “account open” period) must not exceed 15 minutes from the time at which the cardholder enters account authentication credentials; and
– Allowing the cardholder to confirm or to cancel the clearly displayed total transaction amount of each pending digital goods purchase before completion of the transaction. The issuer is advised to ask the following questions when challenging the cardholder and to educate the cardholder on the use of purchase control settings:
1. Was the cardholder given the option to disable all digital goods purchases on the account?
2. Did the cardholder agree (such as by checking a box) to permit digital goods purchases to be made without the entry of a password or other form of authentication?
3. When the cardholder was required to enter authentication credentials to use the account, was the cardholder prompted to re-enter the credentials after a period of inactivity? When known, did that period exceed 15 minutes?
4. Did the merchant site afford the cardholder the option to confirm or to cancel each purchase?
5. Did the cardholder receive notification (such as using email, text, or other means) promptly after each purchase was completed?

4853

Issuer Dispute of a Recurring Transaction

For Mainland China domestic transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
2. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring. For all other transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer listed the account in the Payment Cancellation Service (PCS) prior to the disputed transaction occurring.
2. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
3. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring

4855

Travel/Entertainment Services Not Provided/Not as Described and Merchant Voucher Issued

1. The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction
– The purchased goods or services were not received due to merchant cancellation
– The merchant provided a voucher for future use in lieu of a refund and that provision of voucher was properly disclosed in the merchant’s terms and conditions
– The merchant is unable or unwilling to honor the voucher in violation of the voucher terms and conditions
2. The transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
– Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
– Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
– Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
– Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
– Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
– Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
– Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
– Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)

4855

Travel/Entertainment Services Not Provided/Not as Described and Merchant Voucher Issued

1. The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received due to merchant cancellation.
– The merchant provided a voucher for future use in lieu of a refund and that provision of voucher was properly disclosed in the merchant’s terms and conditions.
– The merchant is unable or unwilling to honor the voucher in violation of the voucher terms and conditions.
2. The transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
– Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
– Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
– Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
– Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
– Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
– Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
– Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
– Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
– Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
– Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

4855

Failed Travel Merchant-Intra-EEA and Domestic European Transactions Only

This chargeback takes precedence for Intra-EEA and domestic European transactions, when the cardholder contacted the issuer claiming a travel service has not, or will not, be provided, and the merchant is seeking protection from creditors, insolvent, bankrupt or in liquidation, at least one of the following conditions must be met prior to the issuer raising a chargeback:
1. The travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, and one of the following:
– The cardholder (or traveler) requested reimbursement from the bonding authority or similar scheme and did not receive reimbursement, or the claim was declined.
– The merchant, bonding authority or similar scheme (including an insolvency practitioner) stated cardholders (or travelers) should contact their issuer for reimbursement and/or the bond is insufficient. For sake of clarity, the statement can either be a public statement such as on a website, advertisement, or similar, as well as direct communication with the cardholder (or traveler).
– For Swedish domestic transactions: no additional requirement. The cardholder (or traveler) is not obligated to request reimbursement from a bonding authority or similar scheme.
2. The travel service was not covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, or neither the issuer nor the cardholder after reasonable effort can determine whether the travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law.

4855

Goods or Services Not Provided

• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received.
• Travel services arranged through an online travel agency or tour operator were not received and the travel agency or tour operator is no longer in business.

4855

Failed Travel Merchant Intra-EEA and Domestic European Transactions Only

1. Within 150-calendar days from the latest expected service date, whether the bonding authority or similar scheme responded or not. The issuer must wait at least 30-calendar days from the date the request was sent prior to processing a chargeback, unless a negative response was received, in which case, the chargeback may be processed upon receipt of the negative reply. The following exceptions apply: For German domestic transactions: Within 240-calendar days from the latest expected service date, whether the bonding authority or similar scheme responded or not. The issuer must wait at least 60-calendar days from the date the request was sent prior to processing a chargeback, unless a negative response was received, in which case, the chargeback may be processed upon receipt of the negative reply. For Polish domestic transactions: Within 540-calendar days from the Central Site Business Date, whether the bonding authority or similar scheme responded or not. The issuer must wait at least 60-calendar days from the date the request was sent prior to processing a chargeback, unless a negative response was received, in which case, the chargeback may be processed upon receipt of the negative reply. For Swedish domestic transactions: Within 120-calendar days from the latest expected service date.
2. Within 120-calendar days from the latest expected service date. In addition to both of the above (with the noted exceptions for German domestic transactions, Polish domestic transactions, and Swedish domestic transactions), when the transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs, the maximum time frame is 365-calendar days from the original expected delivery or performance date specified by the merchant:
• Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
• Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
• Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
• Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
• Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
• Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
• Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
• Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722) In all cases, the issuer does not have to wait for the latest expected service date before processing the chargeback. A chargeback may be processed immediately upon learning the travel services will not be provided to the cardholder (or traveler). The issuer is still obligated to meet all other applicable chargeback requirements, such as making a request for reimbursement from the bonding authority or similar scheme.

4855

Transaction Did Not Complete

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims the disputed transaction failed to complete.
• The cardholder did not use the goods or services.

4859

Addendum Dispute

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in a valid transaction with the merchant.
• A subsequent transaction occurred with that same merchant without the cardholder’s consent.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute. Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.

4859

Failed Travel Merchant-Intra-EEA and Domestic European Transactions Only

This chargeback takes precedence for Intra-EEA and domestic European transactions, when the cardholder contacted the issuer claiming a travel service has not, or will not, be provided, and the merchant is seeking protection from creditors, insolvent, bankrupt or in liquidation, at least one of the following conditions must be met prior to the issuer raising a chargeback:
1. The travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, and one of the following:
– The cardholder (or traveler) requested reimbursement from the bonding authority or similar scheme and did not receive reimbursement, or the claim was declined.
– The merchant, bonding authority or similar scheme (including an insolvency practitioner) stated cardholders (or travelers) should contact their issuer for reimbursement and/or the bond is insufficient. For sake of clarity, the statement can either be a public statement such as on a website, advertisement, or similar, as well as direct communication with the cardholder (or traveler).
– For Swedish domestic transactions: no additional requirement. The cardholder (or traveler) is not obligated to request reimbursement from a bonding authority or similar scheme.
2. The travel service was not covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law, or neither the issuer nor the cardholder after reasonable effort can determine whether the travel service was covered by a bonding authority or similar scheme according to local law.

4859

ATM Disputes

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging one of the following:
• Some or all of the funds debited from the cardholder’s account as the result of an ATM withdrawal were not dispensed.
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.

4859

Charges for Loss, Theft, or Damages

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed for loss, theft, or damage in the same transaction as the underlying initial service.

4859

“No-Show” Hotel Charge

The cardholder contacted the issuer to dispute a “no-show” hotel charge from a merchant that participates in the Mastercard Guaranteed Reservations Service (described in Appendix F of the Transaction Processing Rules) and alleged one of the following:
1. The cardholder canceled the reservation.
2. The cardholder used the accommodations.
3. The merchant provided alternate accommodations. For example, the cardholder arrived at the hotel and no room was available. Although the hotel arranged for accommodations at another hotel, the merchant billed the cardholder in error.
4. The “no-show” charge differed from the rate quoted to the cardholder. Under these circumstances, only the difference between the two charges can be charged back.
5. The merchant did not advise the cardholder that the merchant would charge a “no-show” fee.

4860

Travel/Entertainment Services Cancelled/Returned and Credit Not Processed

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The merchant agreed to provide a refund and failed to process that refund.
• The merchant failed to disclose its refund policy at the time of the transaction and is unwilling to accept the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant has not responded to the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant posted a credit for a reduced amount without proper disclosure. In addition, the transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
• Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
• Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
• Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
• Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
• Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
• Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
• Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
• Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
• Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
• Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

4860

Timeshares

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder canceled the timeshare or similar provision of services within the Mastercard time frame, regardless of the contractual terms.

4860

Credit Posted as a Purchase

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder account has been inaccurately posted with a debit instead of a credit.

4870

Chip Liability Shift

Chargeback Condition. Both of the following:
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The transaction was reported to the Risk Management as fraud in accordance with the China Switch User Guide - Customer Portal on or before the date of the chargeback. For all other transactions: The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as fraud in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide on or before the date of the chargeback.
• 4837 (No Cardholder Authorization) for Dual Message System transactions and Mainland China domestic transactions
• 37 (No Cardholder Authorization) for Debit Mastercard transactions processed on the Single Message System
• The acquirer name, acquirer ID, merchant name, and merchant location are listed in a Mastercard Announcement under the QMAP.
• Each transaction charged back must have occurred during the published chargeback period.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Risk Management. For all other transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Fraud and Loss Database. All fraud type codes are eligible.
• 4849 (Questionable Merchant Activity) for Dual Message System transactions and Mainland China domestic transactions
• 49 (Questionable Merchant Activity) for Debit Mastercard transactions processed on the Single Message System For Mainland China domestic transactions, all of the following:
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• One of the following:
– A fraudulent transaction resulted from the use of a counterfeit card at a non-hybrid terminal
– A fraudulent transaction occurred at a hybrid terminal but DE 55 was not present in the Preauthorization Request/0100 message or Financial Transaction Request/0200 message
• The validly issued card was an PBoC chip card.
• The transaction was reported to the Risk Management as counterfeit in accordance with the China Switch User Guide
– Customer Portal prior to processing the chargeback. For all other transactions, all of the following:
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in a country or region participating in a domestic, intraregional, or interregional chip liability shift as shown in the Chip Liability Shift Participation table (earlier in this section).
• One of the following:
– A fraudulent transaction resulted from the use of a counterfeit card at a non-hybrid terminal.
– A fraudulent transaction occurred at a hybrid terminal but DE 55 was not present in the Authorization Request/0100 or Financial Transaction Request/0200 message.
• The validly-issued card was an EMV chip card.
• The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as counterfeit in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide prior to processing the chargeback.

4871

Lost/Stolen/NRI Fraud Chip Liability Shift

• The cardholder states that:
– The cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
– The card is no longer, or has never been, in the possession of the cardholder.
• Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in a country or region participating in a domestic, intraregional, or interregional chip/PIN liability shift as shown in the below table.
• A fraudulent transaction resulted from the use of a hybrid PIN-preferring card at one of the following:
– A magnetic stripe-reading-only terminal (whether PIN-capable or not)
– A hybrid terminal not equipped with a PIN pad capable (at a minimum) of checking the PIN offline
– A hybrid terminal equipped with a PIN pad capable (at a minimum) of checking the PIN offline, but DE 55 was not present in the Authorization Request/0100 message or Financial Transaction Request/0200 message
– A hybrid terminal where the PIN pad is not present or not working
• The validly issued card was a hybrid PIN-preferring card.
• The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as lost/stolen/NRI in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide prior to processing the chargeback.

49

Questionable Merchant Audit Program (QMAP)

• The acquirer name, acquirer ID, merchant name, and merchant location are listed in a Mastercard Announcement under the QMAP.
• Each transaction charged back must have occurred during the published chargeback period.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Risk Management. For all other transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Fraud and Loss Database. All fraud type codes are eligible.

49

Coercion Program

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.
• The cardholder paid for a transaction using one form of payment and was subsequently debited for the same transaction using another form of payment.

49

Coercion Program

The transaction was identified by Mastercard, in writing, as eligible for chargeback due to a substantiated claim of coercion

53

Transaction Did Not Complete

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims the disputed transaction failed to complete.
• The cardholder did not use the goods or services.

53

Credit Posted as a Purchase

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder account has been inaccurately posted with a debit instead of a credit.

53

Counterfeit Goods

The cardholder states that the goods were purported to be genuine, but were counterfeit. “Counterfeit” means that the goods were not produced by an authorized manufacturer of the goods and therefore infringe on intellectual property rights.

53

Timeshares

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder canceled the timeshare or similar provision of services within the Mastercard time frame, regardless of the contractual terms.

53

Counterfeit Goods

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims that the goods were purported to be genuine but were counterfeit.

53

Timeshares

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder canceled the timeshare or similar provision of services within the Mastercard time frame, regardless of the contractual terms.

53

Counterfeit Goods

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims that the goods were purported to be genuine, but were counterfeit.

53

Transaction Did Not Complete

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims the disputed transaction failed to complete.
• The cardholder did not use the goods or services.

53

Goods or Services Were Either Not as Described or Defective

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute.
• The merchant refused to adjust the price, repair, or replace the goods or other things of value, or issue a credit. Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.
• For disputes involving goods: The cardholder returned the goods or informed the merchant the goods were available for pickup. And one of the following:
• When delivered from the merchant, the goods arrived broken or could not be used for the intended purpose.
• Goods and services did not conform to their description. Examples include, but are not limited to:
– The cardholder claims that the quality or workmanship of the product is not as described.
– The cardholder claims that the specified color, size, or quantity is not as described.
• The merchant did not honor the terms and conditions of the contract with the cardholder including, but not limited to, 100 percent money back guarantee, written promises, or return policy.

53

Cardholder Dispute of a Recurring Transaction

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The cardholder notified the merchant to cancel the recurring transaction and the merchant continued to bill the cardholder.
• The cardholder was not aware that the cardholder was agreeing to a recurring transaction.

53

Addendum Dispute

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in a valid transaction with the merchant.
• A subsequent transaction occurred with that same merchant without the cardholder’s consent.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.

53

Travel/Entertainment Services Cancelled/Returned and Credit Not Processed

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The merchant agreed to provide a refund and failed to process that refund.
• The merchant failed to disclose its refund policy at the time of the transaction and is unwilling to accept the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant has not responded to the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant posted a credit for a reduced amount without proper disclosure. In addition, the transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
• Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
• Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
• Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
• Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
• Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
• Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
• Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
• Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
• Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
• Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

53

Travel/Entertainment Services Cancelled/Returned and Credit Not Processed

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The merchant agreed to provide a refund and failed to process that refund.
• The merchant failed to disclose its refund policy at the time of the transaction and is unwilling to accept the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant has not responded to the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant posted a credit for a reduced amount without proper disclosure. In addition, the transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
• Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
• Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
• Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
• Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
• Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
• Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
• Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
• Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)

53

Addendum Dispute

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in a valid transaction with the merchant.
• A subsequent transaction occurred with that same merchant without the cardholder’s consent.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute. Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.

53

Travel/Entertainment Services Not Provided/Not as Described and Merchant Voucher Issued

1. The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received due to merchant cancellation.
– The merchant provided a voucher for future use in lieu of a refund and that provision of voucher was properly disclosed in the merchant’s terms and conditions.
– The merchant is unable or unwilling to honor the voucher in violation of the voucher terms and conditions.
2. The transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
– Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
– Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
– Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
– Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
– Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
– Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
– Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
– Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
– Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
– Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

53

“No-Show” Hotel Charge

The cardholder contacted the issuer to dispute a “no-show” hotel charge from a merchant that participates in the Mastercard Guaranteed Reservations Service (described in Appendix F of the Transaction Processing Rules) and alleged one of the following:
1. The cardholder canceled the reservation.
2. The cardholder used the accommodations.
3. The merchant provided alternate accommodations. For example, the cardholder arrived at the hotel and no room was available. Although the hotel arranged for accommodations at another hotel, the merchant billed the cardholder in error.

53

Travel/Entertainment Services Not Provided/Not as Described and Merchant Voucher Issued

Both of the following:
1. The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received due to merchant cancellation.
– The merchant provided a voucher for future use in lieu of a refund and that provision of voucher was properly disclosed in the merchant’s terms and conditions.
– The merchant is unable or unwilling to honor the voucher in violation of the voucher terms and conditions.
2. The transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
– Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
– Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
– Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
– Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
– Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
– Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
– Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
– Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)

53

Travel/Entertainment Services Not Provided/Not as Described and Merchant Voucher Issued

1. Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in the United States, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and/or the U.S. Virgin Islands
2. The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction
– The purchased goods or services were not received due to merchant cancellation
– The merchant provided a voucher for future use in lieu of a refund and that provision of voucher was properly disclosed in the merchant’s terms and conditions
– The merchant is unable or unwilling to provide the goods or services in violation of the voucher terms and conditions
3. The transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
– Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
– Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
– Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
– Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
– Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
– Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
– Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
– Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)

53

“No-Show” Hotel Charge

The cardholder contacted the issuer to dispute a “no-show” hotel charge from a merchant that participates in the Mastercard Guaranteed Reservations Service (described in Appendix F of the Transaction Processing Rules) and alleged one of the following:
1. The cardholder canceled the reservation.
2. The cardholder used the accommodations.
3. The merchant provided alternate accommodations. For example, the cardholder arrived at the hotel and no room was available. Although the hotel arranged for accommodations at another hotel, the merchant billed the cardholder in error.
4. The “no-show” charge differed from the rate quoted to the cardholder. Under these circumstances, only the difference between the two charges can be charged back.
5. The merchant did not advise the cardholder that the merchant would charge a “no-show” fee.

53

General Use

Both of the following:
• Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in the United States, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and/or the U.S. Virgin Islands.
• One of the following:
– When delivered from the merchant, the goods arrived broken or could not be used for the intended purpose.
– Goods and services did not conform to their description. Examples include, but are not limited to:
– The cardholder states that the quality or workmanship of the product is not as described.
– The cardholder states that the specified color, size, or quantity is not as described.
– Terms and conditions of a contract including, but not limited to, 100 percent money back guarantee, written promises, or return policy

53

Issuer Dispute of a Recurring Transaction

For Mainland China domestic transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
2. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring. For all other transactions, one of the following:
1. The issuer listed the account in the Payment Cancellation Service (PCS) prior to the disputed transaction occurring.
2. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
3. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring

53

Issuer Dispute of a Recurring Transaction

One of the following:
1. The issuer listed the account in the Payment Cancellation Service (PCS) prior to the disputed transaction occurring.
2. The issuer previously charged back a disputed recurring transaction with the same PAN and merchant.
3. The issuer previously notified the merchant or acquirer to cancel the recurring transaction prior to the disputed transaction occurring.

53

Goods or Services Not Provided

• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received.
• Travel services arranged through an online travel agency or tour operator were not received and the travel agency or tour operator is no longer in business.

53

Credit Posted as a Purchase

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder account has been inaccurately posted with a debit instead of a credit.

53

Goods or Services Were Either Not as Described or Defective

• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute.
• Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.
• The merchant refused to adjust the price, repair, or replace the goods or other things of value, or issue a credit.
• For disputes involving goods: The cardholder returned the goods or informed the merchant the goods were available for pickup. And one of the following:
• When delivered from the merchant, the goods arrived broken or could not be used for the intended purpose.
• Goods and services did not conform to their description. Examples include, but are not limited to:
– The cardholder claims that the quality or workmanship of the product is not as described.
– The cardholder claims that the specified color, size, or quantity is not as described.
• The merchant did not honor the terms and conditions of the contract with the cardholder including, but not limited to, 100 percent money back guarantee, written promises, or return policy

53

Digital Goods Purchase of USD 25 or Less

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging both of the following:
• Digital goods were purchased in an e-commerce transaction that was less than or equal to USD 25 (or the local currency equivalent).
• The merchant did not offer the cardholder purchase control settings. In addition, all of the following:
• The cardholder's account is not closed.
• The cardholder's account is in good standing with no associated fraudulent transactions.
• The issuer must determine, based on a challenge of the cardholder, that prior to the date(s) of the disputed transaction(s), the cardholder had provided card information to the merchant in order to establish an account that could be used for future digital goods purchases, but the merchant did not offer or establish the following minimum purchase controls in connection with the use of that account:
– The option, enabled as a default setting, for the cardholder to disable all digital goods purchases;
– The time period during which a digital goods purchase can be made on the cardholder’s account with the merchant (the “account open” period) must not exceed 15 minutes from the time at which the cardholder enters account authentication credentials; and
– Allowing the cardholder to confirm or to cancel the clearly displayed total transaction amount of each pending digital goods purchase before completion of the transaction. The issuer is advised to ask the following questions when challenging the cardholder and to educate the cardholder on the use of purchase control settings:
1. Was the cardholder given the option to disable all digital goods purchases on the account?
2. Did the cardholder agree (such as by checking a box) to permit digital goods purchases to be made without the entry of a password or other form of authentication?
3. When the cardholder was required to enter authentication credentials to use the account, was the cardholder prompted to re-enter the credentials after a period of inactivity? When known, did that period exceed 15 minutes?
4. Did the merchant site afford the cardholder the option to confirm or to cancel each purchase?
5. Did the cardholder receive notification (such as using email, text, or other means) promptly after each purchase was completed?

53

Goods or Services Not Provided

• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received.
• Travel services arranged through an online travel agency or tour operator were not received and the travel agency or tour operator is no longer in business.

53

Digital Goods Purchase of USD 25 or Less

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging both of the following:
• Digital goods were purchased in an e-commerce transaction that was less than or equal to USD 25 (or the local currency equivalent).
• The merchant did not offer the cardholder purchase control settings. In addition, all of the following:
• The cardholder's account is not closed.
• The cardholder's account is in good standing with no associated fraudulent transactions.
• The issuer must determine, based on a challenge of the cardholder, that prior to the date(s) of the disputed transaction(s), the cardholder had provided card information to the merchant in order to establish an account that could be used for future digital goods purchases, but the merchant did not offer or establish the following minimum purchase controls in connection with the use of that account:
– The option, enabled as a default setting, for the cardholder to disable all digital goods purchases;
– The time period during which a digital goods purchase can be made on the cardholder’s account with the merchant (the “account open” period) must not exceed 15 minutes from the time at which the cardholder enters account authentication credentials; and
– Allowing the cardholder to confirm or to cancel the clearly displayed total transaction amount of each pending digital goods purchase before completion of the transaction. The issuer is advised to ask the following questions when challenging the cardholder and to educate the cardholder on the use of purchase control settings:
1. Was the cardholder given the option to disable all digital goods purchases on the account?
2. Did the cardholder agree (such as by checking a box) to permit digital goods purchases to be made without the entry of a password or other form of authentication?
3. When the cardholder was required to enter authentication credentials to use the account, was the cardholder prompted to re-enter the credentials after a period of inactivity? When known, did that period exceed 15 minutes?
4. Did the merchant site afford the cardholder the option to confirm or to cancel each purchase?
5. Did the cardholder receive notification (such as using email, text, or other means) promptly after each purchase was completed?

55

Transaction Did Not Complete

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
• The cardholder claims the disputed transaction failed to complete.
• The cardholder did not use the goods or services.

55

Goods or Services Not Provided

• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming both of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received.
• Travel services arranged through an online travel agency or tour operator were not received and the travel agency or tour operator is no longer in business.

55

Travel/Entertainment Services Not Provided/Not as Described and Merchant Voucher Issued

1. The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
– The cardholder engaged in the transaction.
– The purchased goods or services were not received due to merchant cancellation.
– The merchant provided a voucher for future use in lieu of a refund and that provision of voucher was properly disclosed in the merchant’s terms and conditions.
– The merchant is unable or unwilling to honor the voucher in violation of the voucher terms and conditions.
2. The transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
– Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
– Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
– Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
– Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
– Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
– Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
– Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
– Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
– Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
– Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

59

Addendum Dispute

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming all of the following:
• The cardholder engaged in a valid transaction with the merchant.
• A subsequent transaction occurred with that same merchant without the cardholder’s consent.
• The cardholder contacted the merchant, or attempted to contact the merchant, to resolve the dispute. Merchant contact is optional when the cardholder is a corporate entity with a contractual relationship with the merchant and the transaction is for an amount in excess of what is specified in the contract. In such event the chargeback may be only for the amount of the excessive charge.

59

“No-Show” Hotel Charge

The cardholder contacted the issuer to dispute a “no-show” hotel charge from a merchant that participates in the Mastercard Guaranteed Reservations Service (described in Appendix F of the Transaction Processing Rules) and alleged one of the following:
1. The cardholder canceled the reservation.
2. The cardholder used the accommodations.
3. The merchant provided alternate accommodations. For example, the cardholder arrived at the hotel and no room was available. Although the hotel arranged for accommodations at another hotel, the merchant billed the cardholder in error.
4. The “no-show” charge differed from the rate quoted to the cardholder. Under these circumstances, only the difference between the two charges can be charged back.
5. The merchant did not advise the cardholder that the merchant would charge a “no-show” fee.

59

ATM Disputes

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging one of the following:
• Some or all of the funds debited from the cardholder’s account as the result of an ATM withdrawal were not dispensed.
• The cardholder’s account has been debited more than once for the same transaction.

59

Charges for Loss, Theft, or Damages

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming the cardholder was billed for loss, theft, or damage in the same transaction as the underlying initial service.

59

Questionable Merchant Audit Program (QMAP)

All of the following:
• The acquirer name, acquirer ID, merchant name, and merchant location are listed in a Mastercard Announcement under the QMAP.
• Each transaction charged back must have occurred during the published chargeback period.
• The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Fraud and Loss Database. All fraud type codes are eligible.

60

Travel/Entertainment Services Cancelled/Returned and Credit Not Processed

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming one of the following:
• The merchant agreed to provide a refund and failed to process that refund.
• The merchant failed to disclose its refund policy at the time of the transaction and is unwilling to accept the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant has not responded to the cardholder’s return or cancellation of goods or services.
• The merchant posted a credit for a reduced amount without proper disclosure. In addition, the transaction was identified with one of the following MCCs:
• Airlines and Air Carrier (MCCs 3000 through 3350, 4511)
• Car Rental Agencies (MCCs 3351 through 3500, 7512)
• Cruise Lines (MCC 4411)
• Lodging-Hotels, Motels, Resorts (MCCs 3501 through 3999, 7011)
• Motor Home and Recreational Vehicle Rental (MCC 7519)
• Real Estate Agents and Managers—Rentals (MCC 6513)
• Theatrical Producers, Ticket Agencies (excluding Motion Picture) (MCC 7922)
• Travel Agencies and Tour Operators (MCC 4722)
• Real Estate Agent and Broker (MCC 7013)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions
• Scenic Spot Ticketing (MCC 4733)
– Limited to Mainland China domestic transactions

60

Credit Posted as a Purchase

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder account has been inaccurately posted with a debit instead of a credit.

60

Timeshares

The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder canceled the timeshare or similar provision of services within the Mastercard time frame, regardless of the contractual terms.

6005

Fraud/Bank Investigation

A chargeback where the cardholder’s bank requests a copy of the receipt for fraud analysis. Generally initiated when a transaction triggers the bank's internal fraud monitoring policies.

7

Required Authorization Not Obtained

• Authorization was required.
• Authorization was not properly obtained.

7

CAT 3 Device

1. The transaction was not identified with one of the following MCCs: a. 4784-Bridges and Road Fees, Tolls b. 5499-Miscellaneous Food Stores-Convenience Stores, Markets, Specialty Stores (solely for Contactless-only Transactions) c. 7523-Automobile Parking Lots and Garages d. 7542-Car Washes
2. The transaction was identified with one of the above MCCs and the transaction amount was greater than one of the following: a. The CVM Limit as published in Appendix C (CVM and Transit Limit Amounts) for contactless- only CAT 3 devices b. HKD 500 for domestic Hong Kong SAR CAT 3 transactions identified with MCC 7523 (Automobile Parking Lots and Garages) c. EUR 50 for CAT 3 transaction occurring in Europe d. USD 40, or its local currency equivalent, for all other CAT 3 transactions
3. The transaction was a magnetic stripe transaction identified with one of the MCCs listed in bullet
1.
4. The PAN was listed in the applicable Local Stoplist or Electronic Warning Bulletin File on the date of the transaction.
5. The PAN was expired or not yet valid.
6. The transaction occurred in the Europe region with a card that had a service code of X2X (Positive Online Authorization Required).

7

Multiple Authorization Requests

A Card-Not-Present authorization was declined by the issuer and subsequently approved in Stand-In or X-Code

7

Transit First Ride Risk (FRR) Claims

1. The original transit transaction declined by the issuer was not a properly identified contactless transit aggregated transaction.
2. The issuer declined the original contactless transit aggregated transaction or a subsequent transit debt recovery transaction using a DE 39 (Response Code) value categorized as “Not Claimable”.
3. The acquirer or merchant did not fulfill the criteria for submitting an FRR claim transaction. For example, the merchant submits an ineligible FRR claim to a non-domestic issuer, or did not initiate at least nine transit debt recovery attempts in the 45-calendar day period following the issuer’s decline of the contactless transit aggregated transaction, or the issuer approved a transit debit recovery transaction.
4. The FRR claim transaction exceeded the FRR limit amount applicable in the merchant’s country, as specified in Chapter 5 of the Quick Reference Booklet.
5. The acquirer previously submitted an FRR claim transaction for the same debt.

7

Expired Chargeback Protection Period

• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in the Europe region and the issuer permanently closed the account before processing the chargeback.
• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in any other region and the issuer deems the account not to be in good standing (a “statused” account) before processing the chargeback. And one of the following:
• The authorization was identified as a preauthorization (DE 61 [Point-of-Service (POS) Data], subfield 7 (POS Transaction Status) contains a value of 4 [Preauthorized request]) and the transaction was presented or completed in more than:
– For India domestic transactions: 4-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
– For all other transactions: 30-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
• The authorization was not identified as a preauthorization and the transaction was presented more than seven-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• The authorization was identified as a Payment Transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than one-calendar day after the authorization approval date. Refer to Appendix E for Payment Transaction transaction identification requirements.
• The authorization was identified as a contactless transit aggregated transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than 14-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• A refund transaction was presented in clearing more than five-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day six). For a refund transaction, the transaction date is the date on which the merchant agreed to provide a refund to the cardholder (the refund transaction receipt date, or if the refund transaction was authorized by the issuer, then the refund transaction authorization date).
• An offline chip-approved purchase transaction or other transaction not requiring online authorization by the issuer was presented in clearing more than seven-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day eight). This chargeback is not available for properly identified acquirer-financed or merchant-financed preauthorized installment billing payments or transit debt recovery transactions.

70

Chip Liability Shift

Chargeback Condition. Both of the following:
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The transaction was reported to the Risk Management as fraud in accordance with the China Switch User Guide - Customer Portal on or before the date of the chargeback. For all other transactions: The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as fraud in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide on or before the date of the chargeback.
• 4837 (No Cardholder Authorization) for Dual Message System transactions and Mainland China domestic transactions
• 37 (No Cardholder Authorization) for Debit Mastercard transactions processed on the Single Message System
• The acquirer name, acquirer ID, merchant name, and merchant location are listed in a Mastercard Announcement under the QMAP.
• Each transaction charged back must have occurred during the published chargeback period.
• For Mainland China domestic transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Risk Management. For all other transactions: The issuer must have properly reported the transaction to the Fraud and Loss Database. All fraud type codes are eligible.
• 4849 (Questionable Merchant Activity) for Dual Message System transactions and Mainland China domestic transactions
• 49 (Questionable Merchant Activity) for Debit Mastercard transactions processed on the Single Message System For Mainland China domestic transactions, all of the following:
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• One of the following:
– A fraudulent transaction resulted from the use of a counterfeit card at a non-hybrid terminal
– A fraudulent transaction occurred at a hybrid terminal but DE 55 was not present in the Preauthorization Request/0100 message or Financial Transaction Request/0200 message
• The validly issued card was an PBoC chip card.
• The transaction was reported to the Risk Management as counterfeit in accordance with the China Switch User Guide
– Customer Portal prior to processing the chargeback. For all other transactions, all of the following:
• The cardholder contacted the issuer claiming that the cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
• Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in a country or region participating in a domestic, intraregional, or interregional chip liability shift as shown in the Chip Liability Shift Participation table (earlier in this section).
• One of the following:
– A fraudulent transaction resulted from the use of a counterfeit card at a non-hybrid terminal.
– A fraudulent transaction occurred at a hybrid terminal but DE 55 was not present in the Authorization Request/0100 or Financial Transaction Request/0200 message.
• The validly-issued card was an EMV chip card.
• The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as counterfeit in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide prior to processing the chargeback.

71

Transaction Amount Differs

The billing discrepancy could be for one of the following reasons:
• The merchant’s addition error that resulted in an incorrect total on the TID or other documentation.
• The merchant increased the transaction amount without the cardholder’s permission.
• The imprinted amount or printed amount on the TID was processed instead of the correct transaction amount as evidenced by other information on the TID or documentation.
• The cardholder paid for goods or services by other means. “Other means” may include the same card.

71

Lost/Stolen/NRI Fraud Chip Liability Shift

• The cardholder states that:
– The cardholder did not authorize the transaction.
– The card is no longer, or has never been, in the possession of the cardholder.
• Both the issuer and the acquirer are located in a country or region participating in a domestic, intraregional, or interregional chip/PIN liability shift as shown in the below table.
• A fraudulent transaction resulted from the use of a hybrid PIN-preferring card at one of the following:
– A magnetic stripe-reading-only terminal (whether PIN-capable or not)
– A hybrid terminal not equipped with a PIN pad capable (at a minimum) of checking the PIN offline
– A hybrid terminal equipped with a PIN pad capable (at a minimum) of checking the PIN offline, but DE 55 was not present in the Authorization Request/0100 message or Financial Transaction Request/0200 message
– A hybrid terminal where the PIN pad is not present or not working
• The validly issued card was a hybrid PIN-preferring card.
• The transaction was reported to the Fraud and Loss Database as lost/stolen/NRI in accordance with the Fraud and Loss Database User Guide prior to processing the chargeback.

73

Duplicate Transaction

An issuer can determine that the transaction is a duplicate when the ATM or POS terminal number, transaction amount, transaction date, and authorization response code are identical for the transactions in question.

74

No Cardholder Authorization

• The transaction is a contactless transaction that exceeds the applicable contactless CVM limit and was completed without successful online PIN verification or on-device cardholder verification.
• The UCAF collection indicator in DE 48 (Additional Data), subelement 42 (Electronic Commerce Indicators), Subfield 1 (Electronic Commerce Security Level Indicator and UCAF Collection Indicator, position 3 (UCAF Collection Indicator) contains a value of zero.
• The UCAF data in DE 48 (Additional Data), subelement 43 (Static AAV for Maestro or Mastercard Advance Registration Program), position 1 contained a value of 3 (Transaction processed under the Maestro Advance Registration Program).
• The transaction is an intra-Brazil contactless magnetic stripe transaction that exceeds BRL 50 and online PIN was not the CVM. DE 22 (Point of Service Entry Mode), subfield 1 (POS Terminal PAN Entry Mode) contained a value of 91 and DE 61 (Point of Service [POS] Data), subfield 11 (POS Card Data Terminal Input Capability Indicator) contained a value of 3 or
4.

75

Credit Not Received

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging that the cardholder’s account was not credited for a refund from a merchant or was inaccurately debited instead of credited.

79

Goods or Services Not Provided

The cardholder contacted the issuer alleging the cardholder’s account has been debited for goods or services that were to be shipped, delivered or otherwise provided and were not received by the expected delivery date.

8

Multiple Authorization Requests

A Card-Not-Present authorization was declined by the issuer and subsequently approved in Stand-In or X-Code

8

Expired Chargeback Protection Period

• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in the Europe region and the issuer permanently closed the account before processing the chargeback.
• The transaction occurred at a merchant located in any other region and the issuer deems the account not to be in good standing (a “statused” account) before processing the chargeback. And one of the following:
• The authorization was identified as a preauthorization (DE 61 [Point-of-Service (POS) Data], subfield 7 (POS Transaction Status) contains a value of 4 [Preauthorized request]) and the transaction was presented or completed in more than:
– For India domestic transactions: 4-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
– For all other transactions: 30-calendar days after the latest authorization approval date.
• The authorization was not identified as a preauthorization and the transaction was presented more than seven-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• The authorization was identified as a Payment Transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than one-calendar day after the authorization approval date. Refer to Appendix E for Payment Transaction transaction identification requirements.
• The authorization was identified as a contactless transit aggregated transaction and the transaction was presented in clearing more than 14-calendar days after the authorization approval date.
• A refund transaction was presented in clearing more than five-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day six). For a refund transaction, the transaction date is the date on which the merchant agreed to provide a refund to the cardholder (the refund transaction receipt date, or if the refund transaction was authorized by the issuer, then the refund transaction authorization date).
• An offline chip-approved purchase transaction or other transaction not requiring online authorization by the issuer was presented in clearing more than seven-calendar days after the transaction date (meaning day eight). This chargeback is not available for properly identified acquirer-financed or merchant-financed preauthorized installment billing payments or transit debt recovery transactions.

8

Required Authorization Not Obtained

• Authorization was required.
• Authorization was not properly obtained.

8

CAT 3 Device

1. The transaction was not identified with one of the following MCCs: a. 4784-Bridges and Road Fees, Tolls b. 5499-Miscellaneous Food Stores-Convenience Stores, Markets, Specialty Stores (solely for Contactless-only Transactions) c. 7523-Automobile Parking Lots and Garages d. 7542-Car Washes
2. The transaction was identified with one of the above MCCs and the transaction amount was greater than one of the following: a. The CVM Limit as published in Appendix C (CVM and Transit Limit Amounts) for contactless- only CAT 3 devices b. HKD 500 for domestic Hong Kong SAR CAT 3 transactions identified with MCC 7523 (Automobile Parking Lots and Garages) c. EUR 50 for CAT 3 transaction occurring in Europe d. USD 40, or its local currency equivalent, for all other CAT 3 transactions
3. The transaction was a magnetic stripe transaction identified with one of the MCCs listed in bullet
1.
4. The PAN was listed in the applicable Local Stoplist or Electronic Warning Bulletin File on the date of the transaction.
5. The PAN was expired or not yet valid.
6. The transaction occurred in the Europe region with a card that had a service code of X2X (Positive Online Authorization Required).

8

Required Authorization Not Obtained

• Authorization was required.
• Authorization was not properly obtained.

8

Transit First Ride Risk (FRR) Claims

1. The original transit transaction declined by the issuer was not a properly identified contactless transit aggregated transaction.
2. The issuer declined the original contactless transit aggregated transaction or a subsequent transit debt recovery transaction using a DE 39 (Response Code) value categorized as “Not Claimable”.
3. The acquirer or merchant did not fulfill the criteria for submitting an FRR claim transaction. For example, the merchant submits an ineligible FRR claim to a non-domestic issuer, or did not initiate at least nine transit debt recovery attempts in the 45-calendar day period following the issuer’s decline of the contactless transit aggregated transaction, or the issuer approved a transit debit recovery transaction.
4. The FRR claim transaction exceeded the FRR limit amount applicable in the merchant’s country, as specified in Chapter 5 of the Quick Reference Booklet.
5. The acquirer previously submitted an FRR claim transaction for the same debt.

80

Late Presentment

The issuer must use good-faith efforts to collect the transaction amount from the cardholder before the issuer exercises this chargeback. The issuer may use reason code 80 when all of the following conditions are met:
• The transaction was authorized offline by the chip.
• The transaction was submitted into clearing more than seven-calendar days after the transaction date.
• The cardholder’s account is closed or the cardholder’s account does not contain sufficient funds to cover the transaction amount.

A01

Charge amount exceeds authorization amount

• Additional charges/fees were added to the charge amount after authorization approval was received, or
• The cruise line, lodging, or vehicle rental total charge amount exceeds the amount you received authorization approval for by more than 15% and no additional authorization approval was obtained/ submitted, or
• The restaurant total charge amount exceeds the amount you received authorization approval for by more than 20% and no additional authorization approval was obtained/submitted.

A02

No valid authorization

• The authorization approval you submitted was not the same as you received (e.g., numbers were transposed), or
• An authorization approval that is incorrect or does not correspond to the charge in question was submitted, or
• The Card was expired.

A08

Authorization approval expired

You did not submit the charge before the authorization approval expired, or
• You attempted to submit the charge during valid authorization approval time frame, but the submission was not received by American Express (e.g., technical issue).

AA

Cardholder Does Not Recognize

The cardholder claims that he or she does not recognize the transaction appearing on the cardholder statement. The cardholder’s billing statement is incorrect; the buyer has forgotten the transaction; the cardholder does not recognize the billing descriptor; the customer was not aware that a family member used the card.

AP

Canceled Recurring Transaction

The cardholder claims to have been charged for a canceled recurring transaction. The cardholder withdraws permission to charge the account or cancels payment for subscription; merchant neglects to cancel a recurring transaction; merchant processes a transaction after being notified the cardholder's account was closed; merchant raises the charge amount without informing the cardholder.

AT

Authorization Non-compliance

The transaction was processed without a positive authorization response and/or contains an authorization response beyond the card's expiration date. Transaction was processed without electronic authorization, voice approval, or account verification.

AW

Altered Amount

The amount in the authorization does not match the amount from the transaction (includes cash advance transactions).

C02

Credit not processed

Your response to the Inquiry notification indicates credit was or is being issued, but was never received or was not received for the amount you specified or the disputed amount.

C04

Goods/services returned or refused

• Card Member expected or was promised a refund for item/s returned or refused but credit was not issued/received, or
• Card Member was billed before Credit was posted to their statement, or
• Card Member does not understand your return or refund policy.

C05

Goods/services canceled

• Cancellation or return of goods/services ordered has not yet been processed, or
• Card Member expected or was promised a refund for goods/services canceled and/or refused but credit was not issued/ received, or
• Card Member was billed before the credit was posted to their statement, or
• Card Member does not understand your cancellation, return, or refund policy, or
• Card member does not understand your billing process and/or automatic billing / automatic renewal terms, or
• Cancellation occurred after the automatic renewal of services/subscription or automatic renewal of weekly/monthly/ annual shipments of goods, or
• Card Member unsuccessfully attempted to cancel goods/services (either cancelable or non-cancelable), or
• Cancellation of service was not processed timely resulting in a charge that was processed after the Card Member canceled, or
• Card Member refused or returned shipment of goods.

C08

Goods/services not received or only partially received

• Full or partial services were not provided or all goods/merchandise not sent or picked up, or
• Full or partial services were not provided or all goods/merchandise were not received by the agreed upon date/time, or
• All goods/merchandise were not sent to the address specified by the Card Member, or
• A portion of goods/services were not received making the entire order unusable/unacceptable, or
• The goods/services ordered were canceled by your establishment and credit was not issued or received as expected or promised, or
• Card Member expected or was promised a refund for goods/services not fully received but credit was not issued/received.

C14

Paid by other means

• Charge was billed to a Card number on file instead of the method provided for payment at the time goods/services were provided, or
• Credit was not issued or received for the duplicate payment made by Card Member in the disputed charge/amount, or
• Charge was paid for by another Card holder/person/guest/passenger, or
• Card Member expected the disputed amount to be paid for by a third party (i.e. insurance related reimbursements for CDW costs or rental coverage while Card Member vehicle damage is being repaired).

C18

“No show” or CARDeposit canceled

• Cancellation of reservation has not yet been processed, or
• Card Member expected or was promised a refund for the canceled reservation but credit was not issued/received, or
• Card Member was billed before the credit was posted to their statement, or
• Card Member does not understand your cancellation policy/deadlines or refund policy, or
•Card Member canceled outside your cancellation policy and/or does not understand your cancellation policy, deadlines, refund policy, or
• Card Member unsuccessfully attempted to cancel the reservation, or
• Cancellation was not processed timely resulting in a charge that was processed after the Card Member canceled.

C28

Canceled recurring billing

• Cancellation of weekly/monthly/annual recurring services ordered has not yet been processed, or
• Card Member expected or was promised a refund for recurring services canceled but credit was not issued/received, or
• Card Member was billed before the credit was posted to their statement, or
• Card Member does not understand service agreement terms/conditions or your cancellation, return, refund policy, or
• Card Member does not understand your billing process and/or automatic billing/ automatic renewal terms, or
• Cancellation occurred after the automatic renewal of services/subscription or automatic renewal of weekly/monthly/ annual shipments of goods, or
• Card Member unsuccessfully attempted to cancel services (either cancelable or non-cancelable), or
• Cancellation of service was not processed timely resulting in a charge that was processed after the Card Member canceled.
• Card Member was billed for an Introductory Offer.

C31

Goods/services not as described

• The goods/services provided or received differ from what was described and/or agreed upon at time of purchase, or
• The quality of the goods/services provided or received are inferior to what was described and/or agreed upon at time of purchase, or
• Card Member expected or was promised a refund but credit was not issued/received.

C32

Goods/services damaged or defective

• Goods/merchandise arrived in or services delivered in a damaged or defective state and/or make the entire order unusable/ unacceptable, or
• Card Member does not understand your policies for damaged or defective goods/ services received, or
• Card Member expected or was promised a refund for damaged or defective goods/ services but credit was not issued/ received.

CD

Credit Posted as Card Sale

The cardholder was debited for a transaction that should have been a credit.

DA

Declined Authorization

A declined transaction is presented for processing. The merchant does not request authorization; the merchant makes multiple attempts on a card that is declined, or otherwise attempts to force, circumvent, or override a declined authorization.

DP

Duplicate Processing

The merchant tries to submit multiple batches at one time; the transaction has multiple receipts; the transaction is duplicated in the merchant's system; the transaction was processed but the cardholder paid for the same merchandise or service by other means.

EX

Expired Card

The cardholder challenges the validity of a transaction because the card had expired at the time. Card expired before the transaction date; the merchant processed the transaction without authorization; the card was valid at the time of transaction but expired before the transaction was processed.

F10

Missing imprint

• The Card was either not swiped or the chip was not successfully read at the time of transaction, or
• Completed a card not present transaction, but did not identify the transaction as card not present transaction, or
• Did not make a manual imprint of the card account information on the transaction receipt for a manual/key-entered transaction.

F14

Multiple ROC's

Card Member acknowledges using their Card for a valid purchase with the Merchant, but then additional Transactions were submitted by the Merchant which the Card Member denies knowledge of the suspected additional Transactions.

F24

No Card Member authorization

A transaction was submitted for a mail order, telephone order, or internet charge that Card Member did not participate in or authorize, or
• Card Member’s Card or Card number has been compromised and used fraudulently by someone other than Card Member, or
• Card Member’s Card was lost/stolen or not in Card Member’s possession and was used fraudulently by someone other than Card Member.

F29

Card Not Present

• Card Member does not recall participating in the purchase/transaction, or
• Card Member’s Card or Card number has been compromised and used fraudulently by someone other than Card Member, or
• Card Member’s Card was lost/stolen or not in Card Member’s possession and was used fraudulently by someone other than Card Member.

F30

EMV Counterfeit

Card Member’s Card or Card number was compromised and used fraudulently by someone other than Card Member.

F31

EMV lost/stolen/non-received

• Card Member’s Card or Card number has been compromised and used fraudulently by someone other than Card Member, or
• Card Member’s Card was lost/stolen or not in Card Member’s possession and was used fraudulently by someone other than Card Member.

FR2

Fraud Full Recourse Program

The Merchant number under which the disputed charge was submitted is enrolled in the Full Fraud Recourse program.

FR4

Immediate Chargeback Program

The Merchant number under which the disputed charge was submitted is enrolled in the Immediate Chargeback program.

FR6

Partial Immediate Chargeback Program

The Merchant number under which the disputed charge was submitted is enrolled in a Partial Immediate Chargeback program and the dispute amount is within the corresponding threshold (e.g., up to $20, $25, $50, $100, or $250).

IC

Illegible Sales Data

A requested sales receipt was provided but was not legible.

IN

Invalid Card Number

The card number used for the transaction is not assigned to a valid account, or not assigned to the cardholder.

LP

Late Presentment

The transaction was completed past the required time limits. The merchant does not process a transaction in a timely manner; the account was no longer in good standing at the time of processing.

M01

Chargeback authorization

The reply you sent/provided in response to an Inquiry Notification authorized American Express to process a Chargeback for the disputed charge/amount.

M10

Vehicle rental — capital damages, theft or loss of use

Card Member expected the disputed amount to be paid for by a third party (i.e. insurance related reimbursements for CDW costs or rental coverage while Card Member vehicle damage is being repaired).
• The amount charged does not match the amount the Card Member agreed to pay
• The amount charged does not match the documented amount shown in the itemized record of charge
• The Card Member claims they did not cause some or all of the damage for which they were charged
• Card Member unsuccessfully attempted to cancel the reservation, or
• Cancellation was not processed timely resulting in a charge that was processed after the Card Member canceled.

NA

No Authorization

The transaction was processed without authorization. The merchant does not request authorization; the merchant waits a day or more before requesting authorization; the merchant requests authorization for one amount, then changes the total before processing.

NC

Not Classified

Any claims of invalid transactions which do not fall under any other classification. The merchant's attempts to resolve the issue were unsuccessful; other reasons specific to the claim.

P01

Unassigned Card number

You processed the transaction to an account number that no longer exists (e.g.- card was canceled or replaced) or
• You did not receive an authorization approval for the transaction and it was manually processed to an account number that is invalid, or
• Automatic weekly/monthly/annual recurring billings using a Card number that no longer exists, or
• Automatic renewal of services/ subscription or automatic renewal of weekly/monthly/annual payments using a Card number that no longer exists.

P03

Credit processed as charge

A credit that the Card Member was expecting was not issued, or
• A credit due to the Card Member was inadvertently submitted as a debit, or
• A credit was issued, but it was not processed before the Card Member received their latest billing statement
• A transaction was inadvertently processed that should have been voided/canceled, but was processed instead.

P04

Charge processed as credit

A debit that the Card Member was expecting was not issued, or
• A debit due to the Card Member was inadvertently submitted as a credit or
• A debit was issued, but it was not processed before the Card Member received their latest billing statement
• A transaction was inadvertently processed that should have been voided/canceled, but was processed instead.

P05

Incorrect charge amount

• An incorrect amount was erroneously submitted and a correction credit was not issued, or
• Charge amount was greater than Card Member expected (e.g., due to addition error, shipping or handling fee, taxes, delayed charges, restocking fee, etc.), or
• Charge amount is greater than Card Member recalls or agreed to pay for the goods/services purchased, or
• Credit was less than Card Member expected (e.g., credit included a deduction from the original charge amount for a cancellation/change fee, restocking fee, fuel refilling fee or late vehicle return, etc.).

P07

Late submission

The charge was authorized but was submitted after the authorization expired.

P08

Duplicate charge

A correction or offsetting credit was not issued or received for a duplicate file/ transaction submission processed, or
• Transaction details (date, amount, descriptors, etc.) for each disputed charge are identical or similar, or
• Card Member claims only one (1) purchase was made and only one (1) charge is valid, or
• Card Member claims their online purchasewas not completed or failed (e.g., technicalissues) and later made a new purchasethat successfully accepted/completed, or
• Card Member is not aware of, or does not remember weekly/monthly recurring billings and believes the charge is a duplicate.

P22

Non-matching Card number

The Card number provided in your charge submission does not match the Card for which the authorization approval was obtained.

P23

Currency discrepancy

A charge was processed in a different currency than that for which the Card Member provided consent to be billed.

PM

Paid by Other Means

Cardholder was charged for a transaction that was processed using an alternate form of payment. The merchant didn't void multiple transactions.

R03

Insufficient reply

THE REPLY/SUPPORT YOU PROVIDED IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY NOTIFICATION INCLUDES:
• Information and/or an explanation that is incomplete or does not fully address the dispute reason or specific claims made by Card Member, or
• Documentation that is incomplete (e.g., missing cancellation/return/refund policy, agreement terms/conditions, or specific information/support requested), or
• Documentation that does not correspond to the disputed charge/amount or Card Member, or
• An explanation that partial credit is due/ being issued, but the remaining amount disputed is not explained or supported (e.g., non-refundable cancellation fee per policy/terms).

R13

No reply

• A reply/support for the Inquiry Notification was not sent/provided or never received (intentional or unintentional), or
• The reply/support you sent/provided in response to an Inquiry Notification was received after the reply due date.

RG

Non-Receipt of Goods or Services

The merchant delays delivery; the merchant charges the cardholder prior to shipping, delivery, or completion of service.

RM

Quality Discrepancy

The cardholder claims that the goods or services were defective or not as described prior to the transaction.

RN2

Credit Not Received

The cardholder refused delivery of goods or services or returned merchandise and credit was not processed. Cardholder refused delivery of goods or services and has not received a credit.

UA01

Fraud/Card Present Environment

A fraudulent transaction was made using the actual credit card, according to the cardholder.

UA02

Fraud/Card-Not-Present Environment

Cardholder claims a fraudulent transaction was made in a card-absence environment.

UA05

Fraud/Counterfeit Chip Transaction

The cardholder claims to not have been involved in a transaction that was processed using an EMV/chip terminal.

UA06

Fraud/Chip-and-Pin Transaction

The cardholder claims to not have been involved in a transaction that was processed using a hybrid card at a stripe-only terminal of a chip-capable terminal not equipped with a PIN pad.

UA10

Request Transaction Receipt (swiped card transactions)

Issuer requests documents for a transaction the cardholder claims was fraudulent (card-present.) Transaction signature does not match the card signature; cardholder discovers fraud.

UA11

Cardholder claims fraud (swiped transaction, no signature)

The cardholder claims this activity was fraudulent (card-present). Merchant did not obtain signature on a transaction; cardholder discovers fraud.