A bit like chargeback without any consultation. Planet Money just had a story from the other side, one of the producers made a payment on another service in er

A bit like chargeback without any consultation. Planet Money just had a story from the other side, one of the producers made a payment on another service in error, and tried to get it refunded.[0] [0] https://www.npr.org/2019/06/26/736352315/episode-922-the-cost-of-getting-your-money-back https://www.npr.org/2019/06/26/736352315/episode-922-the-cos... You could read one of these stories and come away passionately more pro or more against chargebacks, but the real solution for both situations is just more transparency and communication. In SG's case, if they're right that the money ended up at the right place, fine, just let everyone involved know what happened, how PP came to that conclusion, and what options there would be for the parties to appeal in the case of fraud or mistake. It sounds like in the PM story that that approach would have resolved everything faster there too. Transparency isn't going to kill you in this situation. You may be worried about privacy risks, but just make a clear policy as to what you can and can't say during the initial phases of disputes. Transparency will resolve the easy cases, but there are real dilemmas here between buyer and seller rights. I feel like some of the tech that is taking over the roles of payment systems are just pretending these dilemmas don't actually exist. eBay definitely stumbled through buyer vs seller rights for a while, maybe still doesn't have it right. Cryptocurrency is an interesting spin. In some ways its stance is that chargebacks are so anathema that they will design them completely out of consideration.