Not upheld: disputed transaction handling and complaint handling complaint against J.P. Morgan Europe Limited trading as Chase

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B disputed a transaction with a merchant and contacted Chase in September 2025 to raise a chargeback claim. Chase initially advised her to contact the merchant directly, then agreed to investigate the claim and froze interest on the transaction. Chase set a seven to ten working day timeframe for updates and later requested additional documentary evidence. When Chase declined to progress the claim due to insufficient evidence, Miss B complained about Chase's handling of both the claim and her complaint. The ombudsman found Chase's handling of the claim was reasonable and complied with chargeback process requirements. While clarifying that complaint handling can be considered when ancillary to a regulated activity dispute, the ombudsman found no unreasonable service failures warranting compensation, as Chase met regulatory timescales and the minor delays in phone calls and written responses were not excessive.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Chase's initial advice to engage with the merchant was reasonable given chargeback process requirements. Chase did not mislead Miss B about the likelihood of success and reasonably requested additional documentary evidence. The ten working day timeframe set by Chase was not breached, and Miss B's multiple contacts fell within this period. Regarding complaint handling, while the ombudsman clarified that complaint handling can be considered when ancillary to a regulated activity dispute, the specific service failures alleged did not warrant compensation. The one-hour delay in the promised phone call and one-day delay in written response were not unreasonable given the context.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website