- What is driving the growing chargeback challenge based on new Mastercard sponsored research ‘Chargebacks: The Case for Coordination’, and where does the current dispute process create friction?
- How can better transaction insights and information sharing systems help reduce disputes at the point of inquiry and address friendly fraud?
- What can merchants, acquirers, and issuers do differently to create a more efficient, collaborative approach to dispute prevention and resolution?
Chargebacks create significant operational and financial challenges for merchants, particularly as card-not-present transactions increase, and consumers increasingly bypass merchants to dispute transactions directly with their issuer. This can leave merchants with limited opportunity to understand customer concerns or resolve issues before they escalate, adding unnecessary costs and complexity to the dispute process.
Earlier access to actionable dispute information can give merchants more context and time to investigate, respond to customer concerns and take appropriate action before an eligible dispute progresses to a chargeback. Better information sharing between merchants, acquirers and issuers, supported by richer transaction insights, can also help clarify unrecognised transactions, distinguish genuine fraud from friendly fraud and enable more effective dispute prevention and resolution.
A more coordinated approach can help merchants strengthen dispute prevention and resolution by making better use of transaction insights, working more closely with acquiring and issuing partners, and adopting practical best practices. As the card-not-present landscape evolves, technologies and developments planned for 2027 offer further opportunities to mitigate friendly fraud, support compliance, reduce operational complexity, and create a more efficient dispute experience.
Register for this Finextra webinar, hosted in association with ChargebackHelp and Mastercard, to join our panel of industry experts who will discuss what can merchants, acquirers, and issuers do differently to create a more efficient, collaborative approach to dispute prevention and resolution?