Raise a formal complaint with the bank’s card disputes team and ask for a written final response explaining why the chargeback was rejected and what evidence was relied on. If nothing is done, the decision usually sticks and the merchant keeps the money, making later escalation harder because the bank will say the dispute window has passed. Gather the key documents now and keep all contact in writing so the timeline is clear. If the bank will not change its position, move to the bank’s official complaints route and then the Financial Ombudsman Service once a final response is issued or the waiting time is met.
Many UK cardholders see this after sending some evidence, receiving a short rejection email, or being told the merchant “provided compelling information” without being shown it. It often lands after a partial refund, a replacement offer, or a promise of repair that did not happen, where the bank treats the matter as “resolved” or “a service issue”. It also appears when the merchant responds late and the bank accepts that response without asking for anything further from the customer. The problem tends to surface when the customer believes the bank is meant to act like a referee, but the bank is applying scheme rules and internal thresholds.
What the problem is
Where it shows
This situation comes up in the UK when a debit or credit card chargeback is raised for goods not received, goods not as described, cancelled services, or a subscription that should have ended, and the bank says the merchant has successfully defended it. It affects people who paid directly by card (not bank transfer) and who expected the bank to reverse the payment quickly, especially where the merchant is unresponsive or based overseas. It commonly appears after an initial “temporary credit” is removed, or after the bank asks for evidence and then closes the case with a short explanation.
Common timing
It usually appears after the first dispute has been logged and the merchant has been contacted through the card scheme process, rather than at the very start. Many people only realise there is a problem when the bank says the case is closed and the customer is given no clear next step beyond “contact the merchant”. It can also appear after the customer misses a short evidence deadline, or when the bank treats a partial refund as acceptance of settlement.
Why this happens
Scheme rules
Chargeback is not a general fairness process; it is a card scheme mechanism with specific reason codes, time limits, and evidence standards. If the merchant supplies documents that match the scheme’s requirements, the bank may be forced to accept them even if the customer disagrees with the story. Banks also tend to apply internal checklists, and if the evidence does not fit neatly into the reason code selected, the dispute can fail even when the underlying complaint feels strong.
Merchant playbook
Merchants often defend chargebacks with delivery scans, terms and conditions, screenshots of cancellation pages, or a claim that a service was provided. A common pattern is to rely on “proof” that is technically valid but not very informative, such as a tracking status without a signature, or a generic log showing a login rather than actual use. Some merchants also offer a late refund or credit note to encourage the bank to treat the matter as resolved, then argue the customer accepted it.
Bank incentives
Banks are balancing customer outcomes against scheme compliance and operational cost, so they prefer disputes that can be decided quickly on documents. Where the case looks like a quality dispute, a contract argument, or a complex service complaint, banks often push it back to the merchant because chargeback is not designed to decide who is “right” in a broader sense. A typical organisational response pattern is that the first-line disputes team closes the case, and only a formal complaint triggers a fuller review and a clearer explanation.
Your rights or position
Practical leverage
In UK practice, the most effective leverage is to make the bank explain its decision in writing, identify the exact reason the chargeback failed, and confirm whether any further representment or second presentment was possible. Banks respond better when the customer points to a specific missing step (for example, the bank did not ask for rebuttal evidence, used the wrong dispute category, or ignored a cancellation confirmation). A calm, structured complaint that focuses on process and evidence usually gets more traction than arguing about fairness in general terms.
Alternative routes
If the card payment was on a credit card and the purchase meets the usual criteria, a separate claim route may be stronger than chargeback because it is not limited by card scheme evidence rules. Where the bank is treating everything as “chargeback only”, it can help to ask for the bank’s position on the other route and why it is not being applied. The decision about which route to push can change the outcome, especially where the merchant is insolvent or simply refuses to engage.
Legal or official basis
Ombudsman route
The practical official route in the UK is the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) complaint process, which can review whether the bank handled the dispute fairly and reasonably, including whether it followed its own process and gave a clear explanation. The ombudsman will normally expect the bank’s final response first (or that enough time has passed), and will look at the evidence both sides provide rather than only what fits a card scheme template. The FOS process is particularly useful where the bank’s communications were unclear, deadlines were not explained, or the bank refused to consider a different payment protection route that was available on the account. The FOS approach is explained on GOV.UK guidance.
What evidence matters
Key documents
Evidence that usually moves a bank (or later, the ombudsman) is evidence that directly contradicts the merchant’s defence. That includes written cancellation confirmation, screenshots showing the cancellation date and policy, delivery evidence that shows the parcel was not delivered to the correct address, or correspondence where the merchant admits a fault or delay. If the dispute is about “not as described”, clear photos and a short comparison to the listing are more persuasive than long narratives.
What to avoid
Do not send edited screenshots that remove context, and do not rely on verbal summaries of phone calls without dates and names. Do not accept a “store credit” or replacement as a stopgap if the aim is a refund, unless it is clearly stated in writing that it is not a full and final settlement. One thing not to do yet is to start multiple parallel disputes with different stories (for example, claiming “fraud” and “cancelled” at the same time), because it can undermine credibility and confuse the bank’s reason code selection.
Quick checklist
- Order confirmation, invoice, and the original listing or service description
- Proof of cancellation or return, including dates and any reference numbers
- Delivery or collection evidence, including tracking detail and address shown
- All emails, chat logs, and refund promises from the merchant
- Bank messages showing the dispute timeline and the rejection wording
Three common mistakes are sending only a long personal account without documents, missing the bank’s evidence deadline because the email went to spam, and accepting a partial refund without stating in writing that the remainder is still disputed.
What to do next
Ask for reasons
Reply to the rejection and request the written basis for the decision, including what evidence the merchant provided and which dispute category was used. Ask whether the case can be reopened or appealed within the card scheme process, and what deadline applies for any rebuttal evidence. If the bank will not share the merchant’s documents, ask for a summary of what they relied on (for example, “tracking shows delivered”, “terms allow no refunds”, “service used”).
Submit rebuttal
Send a short rebuttal that matches the bank’s stated reason for rejection. If the bank says “delivered”, focus on address mismatch, lack of signature where expected, building entry logs, or proof of being away; if the bank says “cancelled too late”, focus on the cancellation policy shown at purchase and the timestamped cancellation confirmation. Keep it factual and attach the minimum documents needed to prove the point.
Use complaints route
If the disputes team will not reopen the case, move to the bank’s official complaints process rather than continuing to argue by phone. Use the bank’s own complaints form or secure message route shown in the banking app or on the bank’s website, and keep the complaint focused on what the bank did or did not do (wrong reason code, failure to request rebuttal, unclear deadlines, refusal to consider other protection). Prepare the transaction date and amount, the dispute reference, a timeline of key dates, and the documents that contradict the merchant’s defence.
- Dispute reference and the exact rejection wording
- Three to five dated events in order (purchase, cancellation/return, contact, rejection)
- The single strongest document that disproves the merchant’s claim
- What outcome is wanted (reopen chargeback, reconsider protection route, compensation for poor handling)
- Preferred contact method and times (without sharing extra personal data)
The normal response timeframe is that the bank issues a final response within eight weeks of the complaint being logged. If there is no final response by then, or if a final response arrives and it still does not address the process and evidence points, escalate to the Financial Ombudsman Service using its official complaint submission route and attach the bank’s final response and the evidence bundle. Many UK cases are resolved when the bank realises the complaint is heading to the ombudsman and offers a reopen or a goodwill settlement, but that depends on the clarity of the evidence and whether the bank’s handling was defensible.
Pick payment route
If the purchase was on a credit card and the bank is treating the matter as “chargeback only”, ask the bank to confirm whether a separate credit card protection claim is available and to explain any refusal in writing. Where the decision is between pushing chargeback again or switching approach, comparing the two routes helps avoid wasted time; the decision point is usually when the bank says the chargeback is closed and no further representment is possible, at which stage Chargeback vs Section 75 can clarify which route is more realistic for the facts.
Related issues on this site
If the bank’s rejection is tied to a settlement offer or a proposed “independent” process, it can help to recognise when a business is using delay tactics, especially where mediation is suggested and then abandoned; Company requests mediation then withdraws is relevant when the merchant’s behaviour is part of the reason the dispute evidence is messy. If a complaint later leads to a court judgment but payment still does not arrive, the next steps change again and enforcement becomes the focus rather than card recovery.
FAQ and fixes
Reopen timeframe
A chargeback reopen timeframe in the UK is usually short, so ask the bank to confirm the exact deadline for rebuttal evidence in writing. If the bank says it is out of time, move straight to the formal complaint route.
Merchant evidence
Merchant evidence used to defend a chargeback often includes tracking, terms, or usage logs, so request a clear summary of what the bank relied on. If the summary is vague, that is a useful complaint point.
Partial refund effect
A partial refund effect on a UK chargeback can be that the bank treats it as settlement unless the remainder is clearly disputed. Put in writing that the partial refund is accepted only as part-payment.
Ombudsman timing
Ombudsman timing for a bank chargeback dispute usually starts after a final response or after the complaint waiting period is met. Keep the complaint bundle tidy so it can be uploaded without extra back-and-forth.
Before you move on
Set a single deadline in the diary for the bank’s complaint response and prepare the evidence bundle now, because the strongest outcomes tend to come from clear timelines and one decisive rebuttal. Time pressure can build when the bank hints that the dispute window is closing or pushes for a quick acceptance of the merchant’s position.
Get help with the next step
Contact UKFixGuide — Share the bank’s rejection wording and the merchant’s claimed evidence type so the next message can target the exact reason the chargeback failed.
