Bank Online Casino Chargeback
The lack of credit card acceptance is one of the biggest complaints about regulated online poker in Delaware, Nevada and New Jersey. The Mastercard acceptance rate at regulated sites is higher than Visa, however, neither are high enough to be considered adequate for players and operators. Many U.S.-facing offshore sites accept Visa. This may cause players to deposit at an unlicensed site if the transaction is declined at a regulated one first.
Feb 07, 2011 If you deposited money into an online casino and lost and then went to your bank and disputed the charges (I could careless about the ethics arguement) what kind of grounds could the casino use to justify stopping the charge back? I've heard both arguments and I can't see how a casino would win unless the echeck or credit charge had there name on it.
Card issuers have the right to block any transaction that the company does not consider legitimate. Online gaming transactions, even if explicitly legal, sometimes fall into this category.
Credit card companies have fears that date back to last decade. These banks faced a wide variety of fraud processing payments for online poker rooms and casinos. This included losing players claiming that charges were not made by them and fraudsters stealing credit cards and creating fake accounts in an attempt to turn stolen plastic into cash.
Some issuers were the target of gamblers that tried to hold their banks accountable for their losses even though the players admitted making the transactions.
None of these will be a major issue in the regulated online gaming market.
Operator and bank protection created by regulated markets
Losing gamblers discovered how easy it is to scam offshore gaming sites after losing a credit card deposit. A call to the credit card company would erase those losses instantly. A player could initiate a chargeback by claiming that he did not authorize the payment.
The site would have little recourse if a chargeback was filed. The transactions were often miscoded as internet merchandise sales so that the banks would approve them. The merchant would be unable to prove delivery because the product never existed. The site would then be unable to collect from the player because of a lack of access to the U.S. court system, law enforcement, and credit bureaus.
Chargebacks are expensive for banks. These costs are passed onto merchants and processors in the form of penalties and higher processing fees. Banks loathe chargebacks and online gaming has been associated with too many of them over the years. This is one reason credit card companies are not quick to approve these transactions.
This concern is resolved in regulated markets because players cannot easily chargeback a credit card transaction. The transaction is coded as a legitimate, regulated purchase. Many are considered cash advances. The poker site can prove where the player was located at the time of the transaction and that the chips were received. Proper player verification also provides evidence that a charge was proper.
Players that manage to pull off a successful chargeback could still be subject to civil and criminal action. Regulated sites will have easy access to collection agencies, credit bureaus, law enforcement, and civil courts. This removes any incentive for players to try and defraud the system.
Credit card thieves will be less inclined to try and scam sites that run identity checks and know exactly where a player is located while seated at the tables. A credit card scammer would also need a victim’s Social Security Number to help complete the process. Other personally identifying information may also be required, including previous credit accounts and addresses. A cell phone to help locate the player is needed, too. Fraudsters are not likely to have access to all of the information needed to open an account at a regulated site.
Chase Bank Chargeback
If a scammer manages to get through the player verification process, there are other internal processes that may catch him in the act or prevent the funds from leaving the system through a partner’s withdrawal request. Even if successful, there is still a digital trail that would lead investigators to the criminals.
The fact that regulated sites have access to law enforcement will not only be a deterrent, but will also allow for criminal penalties to those that get caught simply attempting this type of fraud.
Little threat of lawsuits from losing gamblers
Some gamblers tried to get out of paying credit card bills by suing banks, alleging that illegal gambling transactions are not enforceable or that states do not allow credit for gambling. This type of action will be difficult, if not impossible to win in a regulated environment. That fact will discourage most from attempting it, especially since these types of cases were dismissed even before regulation.
Banks are conservative businesses. These corporations want to avoid the expense of defending lawsuits and chargebacks, even if the business is legal. This is why most credit cards were declined years before the UIGEA was enacted. At some point, these institutions will associate regulated online gaming with any other online purchase. Unfortunately, we are not at that point yet.
It will take more states regulating online gaming to help make banks more comfortable with the industry. This will also help the profitability of processing these transactions, another motivating factor.
Online poker and casino players will eventually demand that banks approve their transaction or customers will be lost to credit card issuers that will. It is time for banks to see that and create internal policies that address this pressing issue facing the regulated online gaming industry.
A reader who works in the chargeback section of a major credit card company has just about had enough with people tossing around “chargeback! chargeback!” as the solution to every customer service problem. While it is a great tool, you gotta make sure you use it right. To help you do that, here’s our credit card company insider’s guide to the top 10 reasons why your chargeback will get rejected.
10. LYING
Remember, the merchant does have a chance to rebut these things. If you tell us that you ordered widget A but received widget B but have no proof, and the merchant sends proof that you actually ordered widget B, you’ll probably be getting rebilled!
9. THE CHARGE IS TOO OLD
Please, please check your statement every month. We work within very limited timeframes, and, technically, you are required to notify us of a dispute (in writing! Just calling in doesn’t obligate us to do anything), within 60 days of the statement date the charge appears on. Visa gives some extensions: non-receipt and quality. With quality, you have to show you’ve been working with the merchant consistently to resolve the problem. MasterCard pretty much only gives extensions on non-receipt.
8. NOT GETTING A SECOND OPINION LETTER FOR CHARGEBACKS OVER $100
If you’re disputing the quality of something over $100.00 or so, it pays to get a second opinion letter. Within reason, of course. If you’re disputing the quality of a repair, on the other hand, you pretty much have to have one. These need to be on a merchant’s letterhead and have actual details about your dispute. “Car still broken,” will get you started, but if the merchant sends a rebuttal it’s probably not going to fly.
7. YOU BOUGHT IT IN FRANCE
The lovely consumer protections we enjoy in the U.S. do not follow you across our borders. If you buy something overseas, the burden is on you to return the item and prove it the merchant accepted the return before we can do anything. International quality disputes? Forget it. Strangely enough, this is the one category that MasterCard is better in as it does not differentiate between domestic and foreign merchants.
6. TRYING TO CHARGEBACK A DIRTY HOTEL ROOM AFTER YOU STAYED IN IT
If you go to a hotel and the room is filthy, leave within 20 minutes and get proof of your checkout, if possible. If you stay the night, you accept the room.
5. NO PROOF YOU MADE THE RETURN BY MAIL
When you return something by mail, GET PROOF OF RETURN. This can not be emphasized enough. Tracking numbers work best, return receipts work as well. When you return something you have the same burden of proof to show the merchant gets it back as they do to show you have it in the first place.
4. FORGETTING THE DATE IT HAPPENED
When asked for dates, please provide them and be as specific as possible. It doesn’t have to be exact, but if you called around the middle of the month, April 15, 2009 is better than April 2009, especially since we’re going to have to call you to get a more specific range and do the same thing anyway. “Don’t remember” is not a valid option.
3. NOT GIVING THE MERCHANT A CHANCE TO FIX THE PROBLEM
Get in touch with them before you get in touch with us. Believe it or not, most merchants are actually on the up and up! If the merchant offers to try to fix whatever problem you have without charging more, you have to give them the chance. If you’re from New York and got your car repaired in Florida, you get back home and the repair isn’t working right, still have to give them a chance.
2. DISPUTING THINGS FOR THE WRONG REASON
It makes things more difficult and makes it more likely that you will lose. Don’t dispute things as “unauthorized” unless you never gave the merchant your credit card number. Don’t dispute things as “non-receipt” if the merchant did do something but you didn’t get the results you wanted.
1. USING MASTERCARD
With Mastercard (MC) the burden of proof lies on you. If you buy something face-to-face, get home and realize that it’s not as described, you’re out of luck entirely as you had a chance to examine the merchandise. Also, with MC it’s entirely up to you to know the merchant’s cancellation/return policy, even if they don’t disclose it. They didn’t tell you that you couldn’t cancel after three days? Too bad. Seriously, just use a Visa. It’s easier for everyone.
Us Bank Chargeback
Bank Check Chargeback
(Photo: frankieleon)
Bank Of America Chargeback Policy
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared on Consumerist.