I'm really not sure what you're saying here, which is surprising because you said so much of it. >But this is a double-edged sword. No, it's really not. Yes,

I'm really not sure what you're saying here, which is surprising because you said so much of it. >But this is a double-edged sword. No, it's really not. Yes, I pay Amex an annual fee for the level of card I carry. I've done the math, and I get a good value back for this fee -- especially given the level of customer service AX provides. Paying for a service does not make this a double-edged sword; there's no downside for me here. >There is also an inherent risk in this kind of scheme, in that some quasi-judicial process is making decisions about who gets to keep the money in the event of a dispute, and if it goes the wrong way in one party's view then the result is either losing out on money they think belongs to them or taking more expensive action to recover it, possibly via the courts. This is true in literally any transaction, at some level. I mean, even in a cash-on-the-barrelhead scenario there's the possibility of bad faith or swindles, so I have no idea what your point is. >Ultimately I think everyone has to learn to be more responsible about these transactions. This is one of those things that sounds true and wise, but is actually just noise. >Of course it shouldn't be possible for a merchant to take money from a customer without authorisation, It will perhaps surprise you that it ISN'T, and that the disputes in discussion are generally over overbilling or billing after permission has been revoked. >but equally it shouldn't be possible for a customer to arbitrarily reverse a payment several months later even if the merchant has done nothing wrong, or to cancel the payment authorisation as some sort of informal proxy for cancelling a legal contract with a merchant. Truly, the merchants are fortunate to have such a wise defender in Silhouette! >I think the direct debit schemes tend to be better at this sort of thing than the card schemes. You have not even APPROACHED explaining why you think this, or why anyone should agree with you. As long as there are automated billing systems, there will be errors. In the scenario I outline, Amex functions as an intermediary, so a screwup doesn't literally take money from my account. This is objectively preferable to your scenario, where that's precisely what would happen.