I’ve done a section 75 dispute with Amex and it went like this over the matter of 20 seconds.
I want to query this payment and need it refunded.
Ok. Done.
And in that instant the balance was updated.
No evidence?
Had a similar experience with Amex, very good service. Unfortunately Halifax haven’t heard of S75 so currently I’m in the complaints process with the ombudsman.
Interesting, I just done a s75 claim with AMEX. The dispute was marked as closed after about 4 days, money appeared in my account after about 6 days and when I called to ask if it was all done they said that the merchant has 6 weeks to dispute it and provide evidence and if they can show that the claim is invalid then the charge will be reinstated. I uploaded a load of evidence including receipts and emails with the merchant.
Unsure if this is just for my situation though, i was doing a s75 claim after my travel agent refused to refund after cancelling my trip due to the coronavirus outbreak (my t and c’s said cash refund within 14 days, travel agent refused and only offered a voucher)
interesting but can’t see how that’s on-topic on this thread?!
Because before your edit and the title “Section 75 dispute timeline”, I would have guessed you were wanting feedback on timeline of a dispute as a customer. In my case about 20 seconds and no further action needed. It’s clear now you are wanting to know what goes on between credit card provider and the merchant which I’m guessing few would know specifics unless they work in that role.
I would suggest contacting a credit card supplier and they may give you an insight into their specific timeline they follow. I’m assume it’s all roughly the same steps and timings.
?!
2 Likes
not following you. as you know, there was no edit since your post!
i explicitly said “i don’t need an explanation of a consumer needs to do” 
1 Like
Amex can refund immediately or investigate (if they eventually decide to refund, you get your money)
Then merchant can dispute (up to 6 weeks after the money was reversed)
i think they all do. the question is whether they debit the merchant immediately.
I assume they do, otherwise, the merchant would never raise a dispute because they haven’t lost anything
1 Like
Having the entire thread, I finally understand that you are asking about chargebacks from a merchant point of view, so I’ll try and help you.
Having been a retail manager and having to deal with chargebacks I can take you through the process we had with our payment provider (Worldpay) - this may vary with other payment providers.
On occasions, with online purchases, and being reliant on the postal service (particularly with overseas customers) there could sometimes be delivery delays due to customs etc. and the customer instigating a chargeback because they thought that we had not sent the goods - whereas there customs were holding the goods for payment of import duties/taxes by the customer (being the importer of the goods) and the customer not being aware of that fact (for whatever reason).
We would then receive a notification (in writing) from Worldpay that a chargeback had been instigated by the customer and we had a certain period of time to respond with evidence of why the chargback should not be applied. At that point, we would contact the customer and make them aware of the potential customs issue being the reason for delay (which obviously we have no control over) and advise them that we will dispute the chargeback as the goods were dispatched (and give them the date/tracking number and any other relevant information (again - as they would have already received all that information automatically from our system at the various stages of the process via email).
We would then reply to Worldpay with all the relevant information and we would have a period of waiting to see if the goods arrived and the customer cancelled the chargeback. They did, all well and good - no chargeback. However, if the goods still hadn’t arrived by the end of the holding period, the chargeback would occur and we would then have to put in a claim with the post office to locate the missing item. The 4 possible outcomes then would be either
-
The item is declared lost and we receive whatever the claimable amount is from the post office (dependant on the method of posting used).
-
The customer receives the item after the chargeback has taken place and informs their bank who then reverse the chargeback.
-
The goods are returned from the destination postal service as not having been delivered due to the duties/taxes not having been paid and would eventually find their way back to us.
-
We provide evidence of the goods having been delivered (signature on receipt of goods) - whereby (if before the chargeback is taken) the chargeback is cancelled by Worldpay or (if after the chargeback is taken) it is reversed by Worldpay.
Beyond that, there will only be an ongoing to-and-fro if the customer still tries to say they haven’t received the goods or the goods arrived damaged.
A bit long-winded but I tried to make the expanation as simple/understandable as I could. Hope that helps.
2 Likes
Reading through this thread, I think it’s important to remember that there are two main categories of disputes a customer can raise against a merchant, those are Fraud and Goods & Services.
These two types of chargebacks fall under different regulatory and network requirements.
Fraud is broadly when your card is used without your consent. There are strict rules about who is liable for that fraud and your money is mostly returned up front so you are not out of pocket, then your bank tries to recover that money in the background.
In a Goods & Services dispute, you claim that the merchant did not provide the thing you paid for. These cases very quickly get very complex and there are few hard rules. It is mostly a matter of how compelling the evidence you and the merchant can give is. Please expect to put in some work to file one of these disputes.
5 Likes
sorry but it seems you didn’t read either the first post or the title. the question is about section 75 not chargebacks.
do you have any information about section 75?
good point. i’m talking about services disputes.
but again, i am not asking about chargebacks.
Just saying buy isn’t Section 75, just a name given to a piece of legislation that provides stronger terms for Chargeback disputes?
So the process is the same?
I think it’s helpful to note these are not mutually distinct items 
Just to clarify, Monzo does not issue credit cards and thus Section 75 does not apply to any of our products.
However, when you make a Section 75 claim the credit card provider would likely ask you to produce evidence to substantiate your dispute (for example, the goods were faulty and how they were faulty). I believe it is also generally accepted that you should be able to provide proof that you have tried to resolve this with the merchant and failed.
Assuming your Section 75 claim is valid, the credit card provider will accept it and refund you - once you have handed over possession of any material items.
The process of loss recovery then begins for the credit card provider. One mechanism they may use is chargeback, if appropriate. Alternatively, they may use the Small Claims Court. Or, they might just sell on the item with the defects listed.
There are various posts which explain the chargeback process, but I’m afraid I don’t have any experience of specifically dealing with credit card loss recovery (as it’s not something we deal with).
6 Likes
An important thing to note is that most large banks, with suitable evidence, will just directly refund the customer and swallow the cost to ensure good customer experience. Not that it’s a bad thing, but from reading many past threads it’s something Monzo almost never does.
Ahh… My mis-understanding then, as I thought someone had already covered the section75 aspect and you were asking for the process of what happens when a chargeback is instigated (whether it’s via a credit card under section75 or a debit card - which doesn’t come under section75, as it’s not a credit transaction)
My bad…
1 Like
my apologies. others have said in this thread that the charge reversal is only called “chargeback” with debit cards and not credit cards.
this is very interesting. so unlike what was stated above, it seems they do refund the customer first then try to get money back from the merchant?
doesn’t this open large liabilities for credit card companies?