Not upheld: chargeback handling and dispute resolution complaint against Lloyds Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H deposited funds with an overseas gambling operator (P) and claimed P blocked his withdrawals unless he met deposit thresholds. After his balance disappeared, he requested Lloyds initiate a chargeback for payments made in mid-September 2024. Lloyds raised a chargeback under the 'Not as Described or Defective Merchandise/Services' code, re-represented it when P defended, and escalated to VISA for arbitration. VISA did not find in Mr H's favour. The ombudsman found Lloyds handled the dispute fairly and reasonably, appropriately considering Mr H's submissions and exhausting the available chargeback process, and could not hold Lloyds responsible for VISA's independent arbitration decision.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Lloyds could only recover funds through the chargeback process since the transactions were made via debit card. Lloyds appropriately selected the 'Not as Described or Defective Merchandise/Services' dispute code based on Mr H's submissions. When P defended the chargeback, Lloyds reasonably re-represented it, disagreeing with P's evidence. Lloyds then appropriately escalated to VISA for final arbitration. The ombudsman could not hold Lloyds responsible for VISA's arbitration decision, as VISA is a distinct legal entity. The chargeback process does not allow multiple chargebacks with different arguments, and Lloyds exhausted the available process.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website