Originally Posted by
Often1
Does the local jurisdiction require a signature? Many don't and it's only relevant in any event if you are disputing the service or the charge. OP isn't. He is disputing the way the charge is classified.
Where the lack of a signature matters is when you state that you never were at the hospital or did not authorize the treatment.
Well Chase is claiming the transaction was not an "in person" transaction.
But in this case, I didn't consent to either an in person or a CNP transaction. Chase person said they had your credit card on file.
Well if they did, I didn't know about it. In fact, what they did was to key in my card number manually on one of those portable credit card terminals and propose that they send it.
I refused and left. Even if I have a liability to the hospital, that doesn't mean they should be able to choose when or how I pay that liability.
Again, I asked why a restaurant whose bill I paid couldn't again use my card later to add additional charges after I'd left. It seems like signature verification is meaningless, though they have merchants collect them but apparently even Chase won't consider the signature as absolutely necessary.
I'd planned to keep this CSR card because I have no problems using the $300 travel credit to offset the $450 annual fee.
But now, I'm not so sure I would be that eager to pay the annual fee, despite the benefits, knowing that Chase will side with the merchant over their customer in disputes such as these.
Maybe the FTers who maximize churning -- getting the promos and canceling before the end of the first year -- have the right idea all along.