Intro
Chargebacks (card payment disputes) are unfortunately a reality for any business. They're incredibly easy for customers to initiate. The money is usually pulled from your account while the claim is investigated -- even if it's bogus. Chargebacks are often resolved in the customer's favor, and this judgement process is biased -- the customer's card-issuing bank (which wants their card customer to be happy and continue spending) decides the outcome.
They can be even more stressful for movers -- since the chargeback amount can be thousands of dollars.
The good news is that by using some best practices and fighting chargebacks with targeted, logical evidence to prove your point -- you can win a majority of chargebacks. And the Chariot team is here to help (for chargebacks in Chariot Payments).
Most common chargeback/ dispute types for movers
When fighting a chargeback, it's important to laser-in on exactly what the basis for the chargeback. You'll see this reason when a chargeback is filed.
Below are the four major dispute types you'll encounter. Then, we cover the narrative you should write (always attach/ submit a write-up explaining your defense!) and supporting documentation to include if possible in order to maximize your chance of winning each type of dispute.
Dispute type | What it means |
The customer is claiming your services didn’t match the written or verbal description, were damaged, or were delivered incorrectly. Often filed because they claim items were damaged during the move. | |
The customer claims the amount you charged was higher or different than what they agreed to. | |
The customer is claiming they didn't make the purchase — i.e., fraud or identity theft. | |
Customer claims they paid by cash, check, etc and that the card charge is a duplicate. |
How to Win!
1. QUALITY – “Not as Described / Damaged / Poor Service”
What this dispute reason actually means
The customer is claiming the service or goods:
didn’t match the written or verbal description,
were damaged, OR
were delivered incorrectly.
Visa/Amex treat this as a service-level dispute, not a fraud claim.
To win, you must show:
service matched the agreed scope,
customer accepted completion, and
customer provided no evidence of damage or misrepresentation.
Your Winning Narrative / Template
Summary:
The service was delivered exactly as described, per the signed agreement and documented scope of work. The customer acknowledged completion and raised no concerns at the time of service. No evidence of damage or mismatch was provided.
Details:
The customer booked the service on [date] and signed the estimate/contract defining the scope of work.
The service was completed on [date], and the customer signed the Bill of Lading / completion documentation confirming all work matched expectations.
No concerns were raised during or immediately after the move.
Crew notes, photos, and timestamps confirm the service was completed professionally.
The customer filed this dispute after receiving the service and has provided no evidence of quality issues.
Conclusion:
The service matched the contract and was accepted by the customer without objection; therefore, the charge is valid.
Documentation to Attach:
Signed estimate with terms and move scope
Signed Bill of Lading, with signed valuation terms and a statement signed by the customer that all services were performed as expected and items received in good condition
Photos from job -- especially of any pre-existing damages if the customer is claiming these were your fault
Text/email communication with the customer about the job
2. CLERICAL – “Incorrect Charge Amount”
What this dispute reason actually means
The customer claims the amount you charged was higher or different than what they agreed to.
To win, you must show:
they agreed to the pricing,
the invoice matches the signed estimate,
they authorized the exact amount, and
there were no unexpected fees.
Your Winning Narrative / Template
Summary:
The customer authorized the exact amount charged. The signed estimate and final invoice/ bill of lading matche the amount paid.
Details:
The customer signed the estimate on [date], agreeing to rates and payment terms.
After service completion, the customer signed a bill of lading/ invoice itemizing the same charges and agreeing to pay.
The amount charged ($[amount]) matches the signed agreement and final bill of lading/ invoice.
There were no additional or unexpected fees.
The customer did not dispute the amount prior to or immediately after service.
CVV and Postal Code (Address Verification System - AVS) matched, confirming the customer authorized the exact amount with their card.
Note: the CVV and Postal Code match is helpful as it shows the customer was the person authorizing the payment, vs. a fraudster, since they know the security code and associated zip code of the card.
This information on CVV and AVS match for a card can be found under the payment detail view in the Chariot Payments Dashboard.
Conclusion:
Because the charged amount matches what the customer agreed to and authorized, the transaction is valid.
Documentation to Attach:
Signed estimate
Final signed invoice/ bill of lading, agreeing to the charges
Payment receipt
Text/email communication with the customer about the job/ payments
Screenshot of CVV + Postal Code match from Chariot Payments Dashboard
3. FRAUD – “No Cardholder Authorization”
What this dispute reason actually means
The customer is claiming they didn't make the purchase — i.e., fraud or identity theft.
To win, you must show:
they did authorize the transaction,
they interacted directly with your team,
they received the service, and
the payment data matches their real info.
Winning Narrative/ Template
Summary:
This was a fully authorized transaction by the cardholder. The customer booked the service, communicated with us, and received the service in person. CVV and billing postal code matched, confirming legitimate authorization.
Details:
The customer booked using their own name, phone number, and email.
The service was delivered to the cardholder at their address on [date].
They signed the estimate/contract/BoL.
The card passed CVV Match and Postal Code Match (AVS):
This confirms the cardholder was in possession of the card.
This indicates the billing information matched bank records.
These details are visible in the Chariot Payments Dashboard for the disputed payment.
[If relevant] The customer made the payment on their own device, after being sent a payment link by email or text.
The customer communicated with us before, during, and after the service.
No fraud concerns were raised until after the charge was processed and service completed.
Conclusion:
This was an authorized transaction performed by the customer who received the service. All evidence indicates this was not fraud.
Attach:
Signed contract/BoL
Text/email interactions
GPS logs, Chariot time tracking with time stamps, photos from move day
Payment receipt
Job details tied to customer identity
CVV + Postal Code Match screenshot from Chariot Payments Dashboard
4. CLERICAL – “Customer Claims They Paid by Other Means”
What this dispute reason actually means
The customer claims they paid via:
cash,
check,
Zelle/Venmo,
another card, etc.
… and that the credit card charge is a duplicate.
To win, you must show:
no alternate payment exists,
the card payment is the only payment received,
the customer authorized that card,
CVV + Postal Code Match confirms they used the card intentionally.
Winning Narrative/ Template
Summary:
The customer did not pay by any other method. After auditing all records, the disputed card payment is the only payment ever received for this job. CVV and postal code verification confirm the customer intentionally authorized the payment.
Details:
The customer booked and signed the estimate on [date], agreeing to payment terms.
The disputed card payment ($[amount]) is the sole recorded payment for this job.
Internal ledger review shows no cash, check, Zelle, Venmo, or other card payment was ever received.
The customer only raised the “alternate payment” claim after filing the dispute.
The customer did not provide any proof of alternate payment.
CVV and postal code matched, confirming the cardholder authorized this payment themselves.
This information is available in the Chariot Payments Dashboard under the payment details.
Messages and job communications show the customer did not dispute the balance prior to the charge.
Conclusion:
Since no alternate payment was made and the cardholder authorized the charge using correct CVV and billing information, the dispute should be resolved in our favor.
Documentation to Attach
Signed estimate / BoL/ invoice
Payment ledger for your company -- Chariot's Collected Payments Report, or statement from an Accountant, showing no other payment
Payment receipt
Relevant text/email communication with the customer
CVV + Postal Code Match screenshot from Chariot Payments Dashboard