4 ms·
The "light" you've "shed" might be relevant in some idealized scenario. How does anyone (issuing bank, acquiring bank, Upwork, or contractor) figure out whether
by jessaustin 5y ago
The "light" you've "shed" might be relevant in some idealized scenario. How does anyone (issuing bank, acquiring bank, Upwork, or contractor) figure out whether "the client was authorized by the cardholder to use the card"? Do they just ask the client? Do they just ask the cardholder? Of course neither of those parties may be trusted at this point. A court could render an opinion, if the case ever got to that point. However, it won't get to that point, because of the actions of the acquiring bank. They have just decided it's the contractor's fault with minimal investigation, and have charged Upwork the maximum. Please note: this what banks usually do, regardless of the lies you might tell your customers.
- nulbyte 5y ago> How does anyone (issuing bank, acquiring bank, Upwork, or contractor) figure out whether "the client was authorized by the cardholder to use the card"? This is a reasonable question, but the answer is quite simple: The bank asks. You'd be surprised how readily cardholders admit to giving their card to someone. If the cardholder claims charges are unauthorized, that claim is investigated as fraud, not as a billing dispute. In either case, for the amount of these charges, the bank would do more than a minimal investigation. Lying to pursue a chargeback for your own charges is just as fraudulent as someone else making unauthorized charges.