All use cases

Collect / Recover

Subscription chargeback dispute end-to-end

A customer disputed last month's renewal with their bank, the clock to respond is already running, and the evidence that would win it back is scattered across four systems.

Close the loopGet aheadSystem triggerTime-based triggerChatEmailVoiceSubscriptionFintech

What it does

A chargeback is revenue you already earned being clawed back, often over a renewal the customer forgot they had agreed to. Disputing it is slow, deadline-bound, and usually needs an analyst at every stage — classify the reason, gather the evidence, write the response, read the bank's reply, decide whether to escalate. Most subscription businesses simply eat a share of these because the work does not scale. The agent runs the whole dispute inside the response window: it checks eligibility and the customer's history, classifies the dispute, chases the customer for any evidence it needs before the deadline, assembles and submits the representment, evaluates the response, and escalates to pre-arbitration where the case is worth it.

How it works

  1. 1
    Trigger. a chargeback_received event arrives from the payment provider with the reason code, the disputed transaction, and the network response deadline inside the 120-day window.
  2. 2
    Decision. the agent pulls the transaction, the subscription and consent history, prior disputes from this customer, and the reason code, then classifies the dispute and decides whether it is worth contesting. It assembles the evidence the network requires for that reason code and flags what is missing.
  3. 3
    Action. if customer-side evidence is needed (a usage log they can confirm, a delivery acknowledgement), the agent reaches out on chat, email, or voice to gather it before the deadline; it then drafts the representment package, which an analyst signs off before submission to the payment provider.
  4. 4
    Follow-through. the agent tracks the response, and on a partial or negative outcome evaluates whether to escalate to pre-arbitration, re-assembling the case. Deadlines are watched and a stale case nearing expiry is surfaced. Every classification, contact, and submission writes back to an audit trail.
Example
AgentYour bank raised a dispute on a renewal from last month, reason code "subscription not recognised." Our records show the plan auto-renewed with your consent on file and you used it eleven times since. To strengthen the response before the deadline, can you confirm you recognise the account email on this subscription?
CustomerOh — that's the plan I forgot to cancel. Yes, that's my account.
AgentThanks, that confirms it. I'll add your acknowledgement to the evidence and our team will submit the response. If you'd rather just cancel going forward, I can set that up so it doesn't renew again.

Configuration

How the agent is wired for this use case.

Triggera chargeback_received / dispute-opened event from the payment provider, carrying the reason code, disputed transaction reference, and the network response deadline.
Tools & actions
  • Payment provider / dispute system · read the reason code and deadline, and submit the representment package once signed off.
  • Billing / subscription platform · pull the transaction, renewal and consent history, and plan usage as evidence.
  • Customer memory / CRM · read prior disputes and history, and write the classification, contacts, and outcome back.
  • Knowledge base / evidence rules · map the reason code to the evidence the card network requires and flag gaps.
  • Messaging channel · chase the customer for any missing customer-side evidence before the deadline.
Autonomyclassification, evidence assembly, deadline tracking, and the customer evidence-chase run unattended behind the judge. The representment submission and any pre-arbitration escalation are money-recovery actions under a policy class that requires analyst sign-off before the package is filed — the agent prepares and recommends, a human approves the submission.
Channelschat · email · voice
Escalationa high-value or legally sensitive dispute, a fraud indicator, a suspected friendly-fraud pattern needing judgment, or a missed-deadline risk hands off to a disputes analyst with the assembled case attached.

What you need

The inputs this use case runs on. Your channels stay yours; the agent supplies the judgment.

Signals

chargeback_received and dispute-status events with reason codes and network deadlines; customer evidence-confirmation events.

Data

disputed transaction and payment record, subscription and consent history, plan usage, prior disputes per customer, reason-code-to-evidence mapping.

Guardrails

analyst sign-off as a money-recovery policy class before any representment is submitted; judge gating on every customer-facing message; deadline tracking so no case lapses unattended; full audit trail of classification, contacts, and submissions; the client keeps owning the send channels.

Metrics it moves

  • recovered-revenueup: contestable disputes are won back instead of written off because the response work no longer needs an analyst at every stage.
  • time-to-resolutiondown: evidence is assembled and the customer chased the moment the dispute lands, well inside the 120-day window rather than against it.
  • conversion-rateup: a higher share of disputes is contested and won, where manual triage left many uncontested by default.

Related use cases

Collect / Recover

Failed-payment instant recovery

the involuntary-churn sibling where the payment failed rather than was disputed

Collect / Recover

Compliant collections and promise-to-pay

recovering an owed balance rather than contesting a clawback

Collect / Recover

Document-collection chase

the same deadline-bound chase for a missing artifact

See it on your own customer journey

Bring one drop-off, one churn cliff, or one silent segment. We will show you what a proactive agent with memory and judgment does with it.

Book a demo