logoalt Hacker News

bberenbergtoday at 1:43 AM3 repliesview on HN

I got hit with a fraudulent chargeback (claim was the purchase was unauthorized and the person showed up in person to a class) and it was doubly bad because they paid via Link which means that Stripe actively verified them via 2FA.

Can someone explain to me why Stripe (or a competitor) doesn't offer a setting "refuse transactions for cards that have filed > x chargebacks with <acquirer> merchants this year"?


Replies

cpercivatoday at 1:53 AM

claim was the purchase was unauthorized and the person showed up in person to a class

Certainly a person showed up in person to a class, but how do you know it was the person whose credit card was used?

show 1 reply
mriettoday at 2:06 AM

Their business model is to allow as many possible "valid" transactions, not to serve their "clients". They're a PSP...

SpicyLemonZesttoday at 1:55 AM

I don't know this is the reason, but if I were asked to build such a system, I'd be pretty worried that it constitutes a consumer report under the terms of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Certainly I wouldn't want the inevitable news drama about it. "I'm just a poor innocent grandma, I'm a trusting person when it comes to Facebook ads, and Stripe punished me for getting scammed by banning me from half the stores on the Internet!"

show 1 reply