What steps do credit card companies require to file a chargeback for subscription fraud?

1. The trigger: filing a dispute with the issuing bank

A subscription chargeback usually starts when the cardholder sees a charge they believe is unauthorized, forgotten, or billed after cancellation and files a dispute with the card issuer—this is the formal mechanism to request a reversal and is distinct from asking the merchant for a refund ^{[1] [4] [5]}.

2. What issuers do first: provisional credit and investigation windows

After the cardholder complains, the issuer can issue a provisional credit to the cardholder’s account while it investigates; federal and network rules set timeframes for how quickly issuers must acknowledge and process disputes, and consumers typically have statutory protections and appeal rights if the issuer mishandles procedures ^{[1] [6] [7]}.

3. The merchant response: representment and evidence tailored to the reason code

If the issuer files a chargeback, the merchant’s acquirer may notify the merchant and allow representment—submitting compelling, targeted evidence that addresses the chargeback reason code (e.g., proof of subscription terms, cancellation records, delivery or usage logs, billing descriptor matching) because networks and issuers expect documentation that speaks directly to the alleged problem ^{[3] [2] [8]}.

4. Common documentary proof for subscription disputes

Merchants fighting subscription chargebacks are advised to provide documents such as the customer’s enrollment records, IP/device logs showing account use, timestamps of service access, clear billing descriptors that match the merchant name on statements, cancellation confirmations, and terms-of-service acceptance—evidence that can rebut claims of unauthorized charges or failure to cancel ^{[3] [8] [9]}.

5. Outcomes and escalation: arbitration and the limits of remedies

If representment fails or the cardholder disputes the issuer’s handling, the cardholder or merchant can sometimes take the issue up the chain—issuers may refer cases to the card network’s arbitration processes—but arbitration is a formal, limited avenue and networks have detailed rules that can bar certain filings or require prior notification services be used first ^{[2] [1]}.

6. Time limits and consumer protections to keep in mind

Consumers have statutory windows and issuer-specific deadlines for lodging disputes (guidance notes at least 60 days for billing errors in some summaries and longer windows for product/service disputes are cited in consumer-facing sources), and issuers and merchants must follow procedural timelines or face penalties; consumers can also escalate to regulators like the CFPB if processes are mishandled ^{[7] [10] [6]}.

7. The reality: friendly fraud, merchant burden, and prevention incentives

Industry sources stress that many subscription disputes arise from “friendly fraud” (cardholders who forget subscriptions or deliberately use chargebacks), leaving merchants liable—especially for card‑not‑present recurring billing—and pushing merchants to invest in prevention (clear descriptors, easy cancellation, fraud checks) because representment is resource‑intensive and networks penalize high chargeback ratios ^{[9] [4] [11] [8]}.

8. Competing perspectives and hidden incentives

Card issuers frame chargebacks as consumer protection and frequently side with cardholders early in proceedings, while merchants and payment processors emphasize the cost and abuse of the process; each actor has incentives—issuers to protect cardholders and avoid regulatory risk, merchants to minimize losses—so evidence standards and procedural nuances become battlegrounds in subscription-fraud disputes ^{[3] [2] [11]}.