In the UK, there is a facility enshrined in section 75 of the consumer credit act for consumers to raise disputes of credit card transactions which did not rise to their satisfaction. I recently spoke with a UK based professional consumer rights advisor, and asked them if there's any downside to using that facility repeatedly even when each dispute is in fact fully in good faith and merited. She said no, because under the relevant law, every dispute must be considered based on the facts of the present case in question, and not the record of the parties to the dispute. Otherwise the dispute would not be considered fairly as is required by the law.
In the US, chargeback mechanisms are required and governed by the fair credit billing act. I'm wondering if the same can be said as the UK based advisor explained of the British situation if the question was asked of the US.
The British advisor also added another remark which was that the only conceivable way it could influence the outcome of future disputes was if they kept some kind of secret black list of contentious/fussy/dispute-happy customers that they then share among each other in the industry but she said that it's not really possible that something like that exists, because if it came out it would definitely be seen as unlawful, so it's actually pretty safe to say that it doesn't.
In the US however, there are a few such networked mechanisms for industries "tagging" customers in various ways. Apart from the obvious (but in fact quite tightly regulated) credit reporting bureaus themselves, ChexSystems comes to my mind.
So, whether it's internal records to a particular credit card issuer institution, or a database that's shared across the industry as with Chex systems, I'm wondering if there's anything like that known to exist in that space in the US. And, how likely something is to exist in the US based on how it would jive with the active laws if it was known. (anything that would influence the consideration of credit card transaction disputes based on the disputer's past propensity to file them.
Here is perhaps a simpler form of this question: the linked article states:
This isn't a protection you should misuse, though. Before you dispute a charge, make sure that you have a legitimate reason. If it's a problem with a product or service, contact the merchant and do your best to handle it yourself first.
Obviously everything in the excerpt seems perfectly wise and sensible. However, it isn't terribly specific, and especially doesn't share reasoning for what it states. While it would seem never a good idea to misuse anything, can one experience any adverse from overusing this mechanism?
