Call (844) NO-DISPUTESResponse Template for "Incorrect Transaction Amount"
Chargeback Response
Dear Recipient,
Re: Chargeback Response - Case #Case Number
We are submitting this response to dispute the chargeback claim filed for reason code Reason Code (Incorrect Transaction Amount) for the following transaction:
- Cardholder Name: Cardholder Name
- Transaction Date: Transaction Date
- Transaction Amount Charged: Amount Charged
- Transaction Amount Disputed: Amount Disputed
- Authorization Code: Authorization Code
- Order/Invoice Number: Order or Invoice Number
We respectfully disagree with this chargeback claim. The transaction amount of Amount Charged was correct and properly authorized by the cardholder. Our evidence demonstrates that:
- The cardholder agreed to the transaction amount of Amount Charged at the time of Transaction Type
- The amount charged matches our Supporting Document Type dated Document Date
- The transaction was successfully authorized for the exact amount of Amount Charged
- Our records show Transaction Status
Additional Transaction Details (Optional)
We have included the following supporting documentation:
- Primary Evidence
- Secondary Evidence
Additional Evidence Description (Optional)
Based on the evidence provided, we request that this chargeback be reversed in full. The transaction amount of Amount Charged was correct, properly disclosed, and authorized by the cardholder.
Additional Comments or Circumstances (Optional)
Should you require any additional information or clarification, please contact us at Contact Email or Contact Phone.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Your Title
Company Name
Company Address (Optional)
Incorrect transaction amount disputes make up nearly 15% of all chargebacks that get filed each year, and they’re draining billions of dollars from merchants across the country. Most of these disputes happen when a customer looks at their statement and decides they got charged more than what they originally agreed to pay. Maybe it’s a restaurant bill where the tip got calculated wrong, or a subscription that renewed at a price increase they didn’t notice, or maybe a service fee that wasn’t explained well enough during checkout. The frustrating part is you have perfect records that show the exact amount was correct. But you still need to fight to prove something that should be pretty simple.
Responding right away without preparation versus taking the time to put together a case – that choice makes a massive difference in your outcome. When merchants don’t deal with amount disputes well, their win rates drop to below 20%. But merchants who show up with strong records can push their success rates above 65%. That immediate revenue loss hurts. But it gets worse from there. Build up a lot of failed disputes and you’ll end up stuck in compliance programs that have much higher processing fees. Each time you lose one of these disputes, it also sends a signal to that customer that this tactic works and it starts an expensive cycle that just keeps going.
A solid template made just for amount disputes gives you a few main benefits.First it helps you put together all your evidence so you’re presenting your pricing records, authorization records and customer agreements in an order that actually makes sense and matters. Card networks also have Their own rules for amount disputes – Visa calls it reason code 13.3 and Mastercard labels it as 4863 – and a template makes sure you’re checking every one of those boxes without needing to memorize the requirements. And when you have a template in place, your whole team can follow the same process every time and it cuts down on mistakes and makes training new staff much easier.
This template was made to take care of the problems with amount disputes. It has dedicated fields where you can line up the amount you charged right next to the amount that the customer is claiming, multiple dropdown menus for the different types of evidence that relate to pricing problems and organized sections that talk about each step of putting together a case that proves the correct amount was disclosed up front and was authorized the right way.