U.S. chargeback rules are different. In other countries, you cannot repudiate credit card transactions that you authorized (and this applies to Mastercard/Visa, too). You need to do something else if you end up in a dispute with the merchant.
You open a ticket where you describe what happened and attach everything you have. It happened to me twice over the years, both with Visa, and I had them both approved. I'm not sure that in the age of AI agents they would care anymore, but I can dream right.
The cardholder’s contractual relationship is always with the card issuer, which is usually a bank or some other financial institution. This is no different in the US. If something on your bill seems off, you contact the one that issued it, i.e. your bank.
Hmm nevertheless my cases were handled by Viseca, not by my issuing bank. I don't know why, is it because of my bank, or my country, but yeah it seems to be different.
Banks can (and often do) outsource chargebacks to their processor or another third party, but never the card network (since that’ll be the entity ruling on the case in the very unlikely case it goes into arbitration).
Viseca seems like it might actually be an issuer directly (it’s also a common model that banks only act as program managers, delegating actual issuance to a different entity) but I’m not familiar with them.
That’s completely false. Visa/Mastercard chargeback rules are fairly uniform globally, and disputes are possible in many (if not all) non-US countries as well.
Whether your bank knows how to use them well to represent your interests is a different matter. For example, I’ve seen banks decline chargebacks against bankrupt merchants in certain countries because they were poorly advised about the legal ramifications, and other banks in the same country win the exact same kind of dispute. Lacking sufficient reading comprehension to parse the dispute rules (it’s a long PDF!) also seems common.
