We have another dispute between Merchant and purchaser. This is regarding a $2,600 scooter. The customer contacted the merchant and SHAZAM told us to wait 30 days to allow the merchant to respond. The customer received the credit within 7 days. Two weeks later the merchant disputes the return and charges the $2,600 back.

The customer now wants to officialy dispute the chargeback by the consumer. We are sitting on the $2,600 until she completes the paperwork and we file a dispute. What is our responsibility in this type of transaction?

If this is a debit card transaction - either the original debit was authorized or not. If the original transaction was authorized then this is not the proper channel to handle this claim. Regulation E, unlike Regulation Z, does not provide for after the fact disputes between the merchant and the customer.

FWIW - I agree with Randy. It sounds like the purchaser has the issue with the the merchant and not whether the actual transaction was authorized.

(Sorry I'm talking Regulatin E guidelines)

This is correct. It was an authorized transaction. This still falls under Reg E doesnt it? It was a signature based VISA transaction done through SHAZAM as 3 $700 transactions and 1 transaction for $503 to fit under the daily limit.

I suppose it would fall under arbitration and we would have to disclose the fees involved but immediately charge back the $2,600? I probably need to talk to SHAZAM this is my first issue like this.

This still falls under Reg E doesnt it?

No, if the transaction was authorized, Regulation E is out of play.

In my experience, SHAZAM is not going to be of much help - they just do what you tell them.

Thanks.

You might have chargeback rights if done on a debit card but that is a non-Reg. E matter. The only Reg. E dispute she could have is if the merchant promised her a credit, verbally or in writing, but did not process it. That would qualify as a Reg. E dispute for non-evidence of a credit transaction.

That doesn't mean the consumer gets to keep the provisional credit you might give while investigating; but if properly asserted, you must do a reasonable investigation. You cannot just dismiss a credit claim just because what she previously asserted was not a Reg. E dispute.