John Acme is an online merchant. Through his websites he sells widgets to the public. With a merchant account and a credit card processor, John is able to offer potential customers an easy way by which they can order his widgets. His business is new, but he is seeing a regular profit that allows him to meet his living expenses. One day, John opens his mail and finds a letter labeled “Retrieval Notice” from the provider of his merchant account. The notice references a specific transaction and requests a copy of the sales documentation. Acme finds this odd, as the transaction had seemed to go off without a hitch when it was processed weeks before.
John Acme may not yet realize it, but he is looking at a potentially costly situation. He has already sent the widgets to his buyer and has already accepted the payment he received. His response to the retrieval notice will determine whether or not he will be allowed to “keep” the sale at all. If he fails to provide the proper documentation, he may receive a chargeback. The money he earned will be deducted from his merchant account and he may very well never see the widgets he already shipped again. If John is able to provide important information, he may be able to prevail. However, the proverbial deck is stacked against him. Merchants are assumed to be “in the wrong” whenever a customer requests a chargeback. If John’s efforts fall short of what is required, he will lose the chargeback argument and find himself charged additional fees on top of losing the sale.
