Poking sharp sticks in one's eyes...

Ok, so a client had the rather horrid event of having their credit card number stolen and used. They did the right thing and notified their card issuer (citibank) who did the right thing and refused the last "x" number of transactions. Unfortunately, one of those was her purchase of a nice Edward Weston title from me (there were two other "proper" charges similarly challenged). I received a notification of a chargeback request by my processing company and was offered an opportunity to challenge it, which I did.

I called my client, to make certain she was not annoyed with me for some reason *g*, and then reported to my company what had happened and why the chargeback should be resolved in my favor. She, in turn, told her company that the charge to me and two others were proper and should not be challenged. Easy, one would think.

Not so, apparently. My company, after an "investigation" decided that the chargeback was valid and debited me the price of her book AND a $10 "settlement fee" (apparently, if you challenge a chargeback, you have to pay for the privilege). So I tell them that the charge is valid, the other party tells them that the charge is valid...yet...er...does it really take much of an “investigation” to get to the…er…truth? There is clearly a level of complexity that I fail to see *sigh*. Then again, perhaps it is akin to OW Holmes’ overview of the law, “This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice.”

I have no fear of not being paid...my client is very embarrassed about all this and has been absolutely lovely throughout. I just don't see why this is so complex. Urgh.