The Basis for the Dispute
J.M. is a well-educated professional residing in Belgium who was seeking to earn additional income through online trading. Due to a misunderstanding of the legal intricacies involved, she sent money to an unregulated online broker. Over the course of less than three months in 2020, she had made deposits totaling nearly €5,000. Eventually, she grew suspicious of their business practices and contacted MyChargeBack seeking assistance in recovering her money.
J.M.’s case was very complex and would have been extremely challenging to navigate on her own. However, it was a type of case that MyChargeBack has seen and dealt with hundreds of times. First, we sent J.M. a list of the documents we needed from her. Once we received these materials, we began the process of reviewing it in order to compile it all into a cogent chargeback request that would present her case to her bank concisely and convincingly.
Upon examining the documentary evidence she supplied, however, we instinctively understood that her bank’s dispute department would view her case as weak because the merchant would claim he provided the services that were contracted. To address that claim when it would be made, therefore, we solicited an expert opinion from a chartered financial analyst whom we engaged solely for this purpose. The letter he submitted systematically explained why the merchant could not have been able to offer the specific services he advertised.
We also attached to the chargeback request a second letter, an expert opinion from our own professional researchers, which was requested by the MyChargeBack agent assigned to the case. It explained how J.M.’s transaction met all of Mastercard’s conditions and timelines for a chargeback. That was necessary because we knew from our experience that this particular bank’s dispute department is undertrained and overburdened in dealing with complex disputes, particularly those involving card-not-present transactions for services not received or not as promised.
The three professional documents described above clearly and persuasively make the case to any banker dealing with payment disputes that their customer deserves a full refund. We delivered the documents to J.M. and instructed her to forward them to her bank. Seeing the facts laid out before them, they immediately raised the chargeback, demanding the return of all funds from the merchant’s acquiring bank. Evidently, seeing an airtight case, neither the merchant nor the acquiring bank disputed the chargeback, so after 45 days J.M.’s fund recovery was complete and final.
At a Glance: MyChargeBack in Belgium
Payment made by the bank