How to protect your service from a refund to a client or money chargeback?

Question

Payment systems

This applies to any type of project that works with payments via the Internet.
The bottom line is this, there is a service, the user buys something in the project, uses it and demands a refund through his payment system. In most cases, as far as I know, the money goes back to the user.
That is, the user created a fake account on a site that is not a pity, paid for the services, used them, and returned the money. I know that some services like Steam give a ban, while Uplay and Battle.net work normally like this, they revoke the game key from the account and the game will not be available to you. But what about services that can no longer revoke the key?
How to protect your service from this? How to monitor this?
I don’t even understand how I will know, after all, notifications will only be in the account of the payment system. During this time, the user can transfer money to another account or withdraw if he created the same fake acc...

Answer 1

Dokin a little information, because. I am an employee of the claims department for card transactions of the bank. I deal with claims just from the side of acquiring.
Apparently, you are not a payment service, otherwise such questions would not arise. There are most likely five participants in the current scheme (maybe you work directly with the bank, then there will be no participant (4):
1) Cardholder
2) Issuing bank
3) Acquiring bank that services the payment service
4) Payment service (accepting payments)
5 ) Your service (selling something)
There are many reasons for challenging the operation (1), but let's take the two most likely cases in this situation. (1) disputes the transaction because:
1) The product or service was not received
2) This transaction was not performed
Then (2) generates a chargeback operation with a certain Reason Code depending on the reason and sends it to (3), at the moment (2) debits money from (3) without acceptance. If the reason for the dispute is "did not commit", then (3) checks from its logs how the operation went (whether any method of verifying the cardholder was used, for example, a code from SMS, or not. If verification was performed, then the chargeback is recognized as unreasonable and in (2) a representation operation is sent and the money is also debited without acceptance from (2), documents are additionally sent to confirm that the operation was verified. that if there was verification, then there is no point in starting a dispute, because it costs money, and they immediately refuse to refund money (1). If the transaction went through without verification (1), then according to the rules of payment systems, there are no grounds for continuing the dispute cycle and the dispute is closed. After some time (2) returns the money (1) to the card.
If (1) disputes due to the reason the product / service was not received, then (2) also sends a chargeback to (3) with a different reason code. (3) upon receipt of a chargeback, sends to (4) or (5), if you work directly, a request for the provision of documents, in which it asks for all necessary documents to confirm that (1) received the paid goods or services. Depending on the documents provided, (3) will decide whether to continue the dispute or not.
1) The client disputes because it did not: Was there a check? Yes, refusal. No, the money will be returned.
2) How to protect yourself? Disable transactions without checking the cardholder.
3) If you use the service for accepting payments - read the contract in which case money can be withheld from you. Relationships, obligations, rights of banks, banks and services do not interest you. You should be interested in the contract between you and the payment service.

Answer 2

there is no protection from the charge, but it also happens mainly from carders, 99% of a
conscious user will try to ask for a refund, because the charge also costs him money and a potential card ban in billing (billing just doesn’t care if he is a carder or not)
antifraud for highrisk must, because sooner or later you will have to prove that you have it,
but, as I understand it, you are not working with the merchant yet

Answer 3

if the services are rendered honestly, the goods correspond and are sent, the money is never returned to the payer. if it's about fraud, then it all depends on your specific case