Card Chargebacks and Dispute Rights for African Research Buyers
A chargeback is not a refund the supplier grants. It is a claim the buyer's bank raises on the buyer's behalf, under card scheme rules, on a clock that starts earlier than most buyers expect.
When a card-paid order never arrives, what can the issuing bank do, within what time, and what evidence does the buyer need?
When a card-paid order does not arrive, the buyer's issuing bank can raise a dispute against the supplier's bank under the card scheme's rules. The issuer decides whether to raise it, the scheme's rules fix the reason category and the time limit, and the buyer's job is to supply evidence promptly. The supplier does not have to agree for the process to start.
The time limit is counted in days from a date set by the rules, not by the buyer's patience, and it can expire while a supplier is still promising that the parcel is on its way. This article explains the mechanism, what a central bank timeline does and does not cover, what evidence to assemble, and what a chargeback cannot do. It is general information about how scheme rules work, not legal advice, and the rules change.
What a chargeback is and who decides
Four parties sit in a card payment: the cardholder, the issuing bank that gave the card, the acquiring bank that processes for the supplier, and the scheme network between the banks. A chargeback is a dispute passed from the issuer through the scheme to the acquirer, which can pass it to the supplier. The scheme publishes the rules that govern which disputes are allowed and what each side must show [1].
The cardholder does not litigate. The cardholder tells the issuer what happened, and the issuer, applying the scheme's reason categories, decides whether to proceed. The issuer may reject a claim that does not fit a category or that arrives after the limit. The supplier may defend the claim with its own evidence, and a bank guide aimed at merchants shows what that defence looks like from the other side [2].
This is why a chargeback is the strongest remedy a card gives. It works through institutions that have no stake in the relationship between the buyer and the supplier. It is also why it is conditional: it works only inside the rules.
Non-receipt: the reason category and the clock
Schemes group disputes by reason. Goods or services not received is one of the standard groups. The public rules document sets out the conditions for it, including how the time limit is counted and what happens if the supplier promised a delivery date [1]. We are not stating the number of days here, because it varies by scheme, by region and by edition of the rules, and the issuer will apply the edition then in force.
What can be said is how the clock behaves. It generally runs from the transaction date, or from the latest date by which delivery was promised, and it has an outer ceiling regardless. A buyer waiting on a shipment with an uncertain date should therefore ask the issuer for the exact limit on the day the order is placed, and diarise it.
Nigeria: the central bank timelines
Nigeria's central bank issued a circular on 29 May 2020, effective 8 June 2020, that shortened timelines for electronic payment channels. As summarised by a law firm, failed POS and web transactions are to be refunded within 48 hours, down from five days, and web disputes are to be acknowledged immediately by the issuer and resolved within 48 hours [3].
Read that carefully. The circular is about failed transactions and disputes over the electronic transaction itself, such as a debit with no completed payment or an unauthorised charge. It does not turn a late or missing delivery into a 48-hour matter. A buyer whose card was debited and whose goods did not arrive has a different complaint, and the scheme's non-receipt rules and the issuer's internal procedure govern it.
We could not retrieve the circular itself, only the law-firm summary, and the circular should be read in full from the central bank before it is quoted to anyone. Dated 2020, it may also have been amended since.
Kenya and South Africa: issuer procedure and the regulator behind it
In Kenya and South Africa the same scheme rules apply to the same card brands, and the banks operate under their own regulators: the Central Bank of Kenya and the South African Reserve Bank with the sector's banking ombud. We did not verify specific consumer-dispute timelines imposed by either regulator for this article, so none are stated.
The practical sequence is the same everywhere. Contact the supplier in writing and give a reasonable date for resolution. Contact the issuer's dispute desk before the scheme's limit, not after. If the issuer declines, ask for the decision and its reason in writing, then use the bank's formal complaint process and the regulator or ombud after that.
The evidence pack
The issuer needs to be able to show a neutral reader three things: that you paid, that you were promised something, and that it did not arrive. Build the pack as the order is placed, not when the problem appears.
- The order confirmation or invoice, showing what was ordered, the price and the promised delivery date or window.
- The card statement line, with the merchant descriptor as it appears.
- The tracking record: a saved copy or screenshot of the courier's page showing the last status, with the date it was captured.
- Correspondence with the supplier, in writing, showing that you asked about the delay and what answer you received.
- Where relevant, the supplier's published delivery terms as they stood at the time of purchase.
A common failure is a pack made entirely of the buyer's account of events. A tracking page showing no movement, saved on two different dates, is far stronger than a statement that nothing arrived.
What a chargeback cannot do
| Situation | Fit with a non-receipt dispute |
|---|---|
| Goods never arrived and supplier is silent | Good fit, if raised within the scheme's limit |
| Goods arrived late, within a reasonable margin | Poor fit; pursue the supplier or the courier |
| Goods arrived but part of the order is missing | Different category; the issuer will advise |
| Goods arrived with a temperature or damage concern | Usually a claim against the courier or supplier, with a received-condition record |
| Payment made by mobile money or bank transfer | No chargeback exists; see the article on paying by each rail |
A chargeback is also a blunt instrument for a continuing relationship. It tells the supplier's bank that the supplier failed to deliver, and a supplier with many such claims can lose its ability to take cards. Use it when delivery has failed, not as a negotiating position over a short delay.
Keeping the supplier relationship while a dispute runs
Raise the dispute and the conversation together. Tell the supplier in writing that you have asked your bank to open a dispute because of non-delivery, that you remain willing to accept delivery or a refund, and that you will withdraw the dispute with the bank if either arrives. That is honest, it gives the supplier a clear way out, and it leaves a record.
If the goods arrive after the dispute is opened, tell the issuer at once. A dispute for non-receipt that stays open after delivery is no longer accurate.
For next time: place the first order with a supplier by card if you can, note the issuer's dispute limit on the day, and save the tracking page on the dates that matter. The pillar article on paying by mobile money, card or transfer compares what each rail leaves open to you.
References
- Visa Core Rules and Visa Product and Service RulesVisa
- Chargebacks and disputes guideLloyds Bank Cardnet
- Chargeback period reduction for ATMs, POS and web transactionsMondaq (Nigeria), 2020