Our investigation

Banks must assess whether a chargeback request falls within the grounds set out in the card provider’s rules. If it does, they should initiate a chargeback request with the card provider and explain the process clearly to the customer. The bank initially treated the matter as fraud before referring it to the chargebacks team. A team member advised Michaela to contact the hotel and booking site, but Michaela was unable to reach either. Later, the bank asked Michaela for supporting documents, which she supplied the same day, but the bank declined to proceed with a chargeback, saying the documentation showed she had confirmed the booking of two rooms in US dollars. Michaela said the details in the booking confirmation were different to those shown in the terms of sale and appeared only after clicking “confirm.” The bank stood by its decision not to proceed with a chargeback request.

We found the bank failed to consider the terms Michaela saw before confirming the booking, instead concentrating only on what showed after clicking the confirm button. It did not ask for evidence of those initial terms, despite Michaela's consistent explanation. The bank also overlooked a valid chargeback ground under the card’s misrepresentation rules. These state that a customer can seek a chargeback if the merchant has misrepresented the terms of sale. Michaela's experience was consistent with other complaints about the same merchant. The bank also failed to clearly explain the chargeback process to Michaela.

Outcome

The bank and Michaela agreed with our recommendation that the bank pay her $581.85. This covered the $481.85 she had been charged, along with $100 for the inconvenience she had suffered.