How to Resolve a Billing Dispute Before the Chargeback: When Trust Has Already Broken
Priya Nair has a folder on her desktop labeled "billing dispute evidence." Inside: a screenshot of the double charge on her bank statement — $299 twice on January 23rd. A copy of her support ticket, BL-7823, filed on January 24th. The auto-reply promising resolution in five business days. Two follow-up emails, both unanswered. It is now February 6th. The $299 she was double-charged triggered a $35 overdraft fee — she's a freelancer, and that extra charge hit when her account was between client payments. She posted about it on Twitter. She's not exaggerating when she says she'll file a chargeback today. She means it. She's already Googled how. The call you're about to take isn't about $299. It's about whether your company is the kind that makes promises it keeps.
Why This Conversation Goes Wrong
You ask her to explain from the beginning. "Can you walk me through what happened?" She filed a ticket. She sent two follow-up emails. She's already explained this three times to people who did nothing. Asking her to repeat the story is asking her to perform her frustration for your benefit. Pull up ticket BL-7823. The story is right there.
You blame the system. "It looks like the refund got stuck in our processing queue." That's your problem, not hers. She doesn't care about your queue. System explanations without ownership sound like excuses. She heard a promise. The promise was broken. The reason the promise was broken is irrelevant to her — she needs to know you're going to fix it right now.
You process the refund but ignore the overdraft. The $299 is the obvious problem. The $35 overdraft fee is the insult. If you refund the double charge and pretend the overdraft doesn't exist, you've demonstrated that you only fix what's in your system, not what's in her bank account. She'll take the refund and file the chargeback anyway — on principle.
You say "3-5 business days" again. That exact phrase is what got you here. The original ticket promised 5 business days. It's been 13. If you say "3-5 business days" on this call, you've just proven that the last person who said it didn't mean it either. Priya needs a specific timeline and a specific confirmation number she can verify.
The Proof of Action
Priya's trust isn't damaged — it's gone. Previous agents said the right words and then did nothing. Words have no value on this call. Only verifiable actions count. The Proof of Action framework replaces promises with evidence: real-time processing she can hear happening, confirmation numbers she can check, timelines tied to specific actions you're taking while she's on the phone. You're not rebuilding trust with empathy. You're rebuilding it with receipts.
Validate instantly — from the ticket, not from her
"Priya, I'm pulling up ticket BL-7823 right now. I can see the double charge of $299 on January 23rd and the refund that was promised on the 24th. I can also see it was never processed. That's unacceptable, and I'm sorry." You just proved three things: you have the information, you've read it, and you're not going to make her re-explain. That alone drops her defensiveness by half.
Process the refund while she's on the phone
"I'm processing the $299 refund right now — not submitting a request, processing it. You should see a pending credit within 24 hours. I'm going to give you a confirmation number: RF-90221. If it doesn't appear by tomorrow at 5pm, you call me directly at this extension." Actions with timestamps and tracking numbers. Not promises. Proof.
Address the overdraft before she has to ask
"I also see that a double charge like this, depending on timing, could have triggered bank fees. Did you incur any overdraft charges from this? ... $35. I'm adding that to the refund as a billing adjustment. Same confirmation number." If she has to fight for the $35, you've won the battle and lost the war. Proactively covering the collateral damage signals that you're thinking about her situation, not your ticket.
Explain what went wrong — without deflecting
"I want to tell you what happened with the original refund, because you deserve to know. The ticket was flagged for manual review — which is standard for amounts over $200 — but the manual review queue had a backlog and your ticket was never picked up. Your follow-up emails went to the general queue, not to the reviewer. That's a process failure on our end." Transparency about the failure is not weakness. It's the only thing that makes "it won't happen again" credible.
Offer the goodwill gesture — and mean it
"I'd also like to add a one-month service credit to your account as a genuine apology — not a discount, an actual credit. You've been a customer for two years with zero billing issues, and we dropped the ball." This is the hinge moment. If Priya feels genuinely made whole — refund, overdraft, explanation, and goodwill — she'll mention the tweet. Not because you asked. Because she's fair, and you just proved you are too.
The moment that changes everything
The chargeback isn't about the money. It's about being heard.
Priya can get her $299 back through a chargeback. She knows this — she's already researched the process. So why is she on the phone with you instead of just filing it? Because a chargeback is a last resort. It flags her account. It takes 30-60 days. It's a hassle. She's calling because she's giving your company one final chance to prove that a human being is on the other end of this transaction. The chargeback threat isn't leverage — it's a deadline. She's telling you: "This is the last conversation I'm willing to have about this." If you meet that moment with another empty promise, she's not bluffing. But if you meet it with real-time action — a refund she can see processing, a confirmation number she can track, an overdraft fee she didn't have to argue for — you've just converted a lost customer into something more valuable: someone who knows that when things go wrong, your company actually fixes them. That's the customer who stays for five more years. And takes down the tweet.
What to Say (and What Not To)
Instead of
"Can you walk me through what happened?"
Try this
"I'm pulling up ticket BL-7823 right now. I can see the double charge and the refund that was never processed."
Instead of
"The refund should process in 3-5 business days."
Try this
"I'm processing it right now. Confirmation number RF-90221. If it's not in your account by tomorrow at 5pm, call me directly."
Instead of
"Unfortunately, we can't reimburse third-party bank fees."
Try this
"Did the double charge trigger any overdraft fees? ... $35. I'm adding that to the refund as a billing adjustment."
Instead of
"I apologize for the inconvenience."
Try this
"Two weeks, two unanswered emails, and a promise that wasn't kept. That's not the experience you should have had. Here's what I'm doing about it right now."
Instead of
"Is there anything else I can help with today?"
Try this
"You've been a customer for two years with a clean record, and we failed you. I'm adding a one-month service credit. You've earned better than this."
The Bigger Picture
Chargebacks cost merchants significantly more than the disputed amount. Beyond the refund itself, the average chargeback carries $15-25 in processing fees, plus the cost of the product or service already delivered. For SaaS companies, Chargebacks911 estimates the true cost of a chargeback at 2-3x the transaction amount when you factor in fees, operational costs, and increased payment processor scrutiny. Priya's $299 chargeback would actually cost the company $600-900. Resolving it on this call costs the company $334 (the refund plus the overdraft fee) and retains a two-year customer.
The deeper pattern in Priya's case is a failure of internal escalation, not a failure of customer service. The original agent likely did submit the refund — but a manual review queue with no SLA, no escalation trigger, and no customer notification created a 13-day black hole. According to Freshdesk research, 33% of customers say the most frustrating aspect of support is having to contact a company multiple times about the same issue. Priya contacted them three times. Each unanswered follow-up compounded her frustration exponentially, not linearly.
There's a strategic dimension to Priya's social media post. She has a following — she's a freelance designer, and designers share tools and vendor experiences publicly. A 2023 Sprout Social study found that 46% of consumers have used social media to call out a brand, and 65% of those who received a response felt more positively about the brand afterward. If Priya takes down her tweet and replaces it with "they actually fixed it — respect," that's marketing you can't buy. The ROI on this call isn't $299. It's the reputational swing.
Practice This Conversation
10 minutes · AI voice roleplay with Priya Nair
Reading about this is step one. Practicing it changes everything. Sonitura lets you rehearse this exact conversation with Priya Nair, a realistic AI freelance graphic designer, double-charged $299, overdraft fee who reacts to your words in real time. It takes 10 minutes. When a customer calls with evidence, a deadline, and a chargeback button, you'll already know how to replace promises with proof.
Practice This Scenario Free →