I'm a bit fuzzy on all the details as to time and place, but a few years ago mc/visa I believe tried to write into their merchant's agreements a provision requiring all transactions be done in local currency, as effective at that might be (after all their regulations require any valid card be honored). At least one of the payment processors sued that they couldn't do that and won the case. After that mc/visa hit on the idea because they make profits on foreign currency exchanges as does your bank, of converting their foreign currency fees to foreign transaction fees so it's now no skin off their rear ends whether one is dcc'd or not.

Chase would likely give you a courtesy credit below a certain threshold automatically. A larger purchase like at a hotel or department store would likely result in a chargeback situation. I don't know at what point they'd say, "Enough is enough!" If they started getting a flood of complaints from people like us about getting hit with DCC, perhaps they'd take the case to Visa. I imagine that by the numbers Chase is one of the largest issuers of Visa cards in the world, so you would think they'd have some pull.

Furthermore, with Chase it's really easy to see exactly by how much you got ripped off with DCC. The posted transaction amount without DCC is the Visa rate on the posting date. So, you multiply the Visa rate on the transaction posting date with what the price was in local currency and subtract that total from the amount that shows up on your statement.

It's my understanding that in the case of DCC that Visa and MC would lose out on the 1% conversion fee they charge the issuer, so there's a slight disadvantage for Visa/MC when customers use cards overseas and the transaction doesn't use the Visa/MC rate. However, since Visa/MC rates are typically competitive compared to the interbank rate, I don't consider a 1% conversion fee particularly usurious if the banks decide to pass it on to the customer.

You are absolutely correct however that almost all issuers have switched to FTFs from the language of currency conversion fees. This allows them to charge a fee regardless of whether or not they ever deal with a currency conversion. It doesn't matter whether or not the customer accepts DCC; the FTF happens either way. This is a nuance that is lost on almost all of the articles that I've seen on of topic of whether or not to accept DCC. There are those who say, "Never accept DCC in any case." That's the correct mentality. However, I cringe when I read, "Well, it depends on whose fee is lower." This article is a great example. The author says:

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. By definition, a FTF will be levied on any foreign transactions, regardless of the currency denomination of the transaction. So even in the person faced with this choice follows this advice exactly and "correctly" chooses DCC because the fee is only 2% vs. the issuer's 3%, the customer will have just paid a 5% surcharge for that transaction. Never ever accept DCC, especially if your card has a FTF. The choice is abundantly clear if your card charges a FTF.

As I said in my post earlier, I think the payment processors have the most to gain from DCC because they don't shoulder the responsibility of a chargeback in the case of a customer feeling cheated. That's on the merchant. I think the payment processor also gets the bulk of any profits derived from the DCC markup. I think it will be difficult to get rid of DCC if you look at the breakdown of the winners and losers with DCC:

• Merchant: WINNER (mostly) - The merchant will get to keep some of the profits from the DCC markup but could lose out whenever there is a chargeback because of forced DCC. Since chargebacks are rare, the merchant mostly wins.
• Payment Processor: BIG WINNER - The payment processors are the ones we need to shame here. They enable DCC or sometimes force it upon an unsuspecting merchant. They extoll the benefits of being able to provide customers with a value-added service blah blah blah... However, in the case of a chargeback the processor still wins. They throw the hot potato to the merchant and say, "Well, no... you had to give the customer the choice, and you didn't so it's your problem. Catch!"
• Visa/MC: NEUTRAL - In the case of DCC, they're not doing any conversions, so the 1% fee isn't applied. While there might be some small profit within the 1%, the rates are usually competitive, so it's not that much higher. They stand to lose as more and more customers get fed up with the DCC games/FTFs and either pay cash or use AmEx/Discover where possible. It is clear that they have an incentive to make sure at the very least that DCC is disclosed and offered as a choice. In an ideal setting they'd want to prohibit the practice because we all know how some merchants are dishonest when presenting the "choice".
• Card Issuer: WINNER (slightly) - If the issuer charges a FTF, the issuer will get an extra 1% of the transaction amount since the transaction comes across as the cardholder's currency. The card issuer stands to lose if the issuer gets complaints about customer's unwillingly getting hit with DCC and decides to issue a credit rather than a full chargeback. There are likely costs behind the scenes to file a chargeback as well. But just like in the case of the merchant, very few cardholders will actually file a chargeback related to DCC, so the issuers don't yet have an incentive to ask Visa/MC to prevent DCC.
• Customer: BIG LOSER - The bottom line is when you accept DCC you pay more for the same goods and services you would have received had you not accepted DCC. a 3-5% surcharge isn't worth it just to know exactly how much you paid in your home currency.

Majuki - I agree with card processor, merchant and customer.

Visa/MC: The cynical side of me thinks Visa/MC tacitly approves this. They lose on the 1% foriegn currency conversion charge and currency spread, but the charge is not very high and the spread is very thin (vis-a-viz Unionpay or even retail banks). But they gain higher merchant acceptance and increase local interchange (.18% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee).

Furthermore there is a network effect to increasing merchant acceptance - the more merchants accept V/MC abroad, the harder it is for cardholders to avoid them while travelling if they become more aware of its potential to cost them more.

Card issuer: depending on fee structure, they are pretty negative. At least for here in HK where they were happily collecting 0.95% bank foreign currency conversion fee in addition to V/MC's 1% until DCC came about. Now they are dealing with more and more DCC cases (as more and more cardholder becomes aware they're being scammed, esp in HK given our proximity to China without being part of it for credit card purposes).

I think issuers in HK will like to have DCC switched off either for their cards if not system-wide. They've been doing all sorts of overseas spend promos which explicitly exclude DCC - gets us in HK to fight DCC collectively.

I agree that the issuer could be negative depending on whether or not the issuer charges a foreign currency conversion fee or a foreign transaction fee. Most, if not all, issuers in the US have switched to FTFs for those cards that have them, so you get nicked with the fee whether or not you accept DCC. I know you have indicated that your HK cards impose a conversion fee rather than a transaction fee, so I think they would have more of an incentive to file a chargeback than issuers who charge a FTF.

It's still unclear on the Visa/MC side. Does the option of DCC really increase merchant acceptance? As people become more aware of DCC or realize that using a card would cost 3-7% more over cash, wouldn't this steer people toward using cash for purchases, opposite of what Visa/MC want?

It's similar to gas stations here in some states that allow cash "discounts" over credit prices. With the current price of fuel one pays about 3% more for the credit price. This is particularly common in New Jersey where all stations are full service, and I see most people paying cash for fuel. The mentality is cash is cheaper than credit/debit. That mentality could spread to overseas purchases which is exactly what Visa/MC don't want.

Well it may have something to do with the relatively low awareness that DCC is a scam.

By condoning non-compliant DCC, V/MC figured having one more merchant who can advertise V/MC acceptance outweighs to a hundred cardholders outweighs the cost of dealing with the one who complains, even if he tries to spread awareness of the DCC scam.

Regarding your last paragraph, we went through a discussion of this and I don't want to kidnap the thread but...although I know several states despite the legislation allowing surcharges on cc's had or still have prohibitions on surcharges, the one in NY was thrown out as a violation of freedom of speech (I finally read the decision and to me it's still a stretch; basically the judge said there really is no difference between a surcharge and a discount for cash so why should a merchant be prohibited from a surcharge when he or she can charge extra simply by calling it a cash discount). But the question is this; does any state, even the ones which prohibit surcharges, enforce the reg against gasoline retailers and do anything about their surcharges hidden as cash discounts? Apologies but I don't see any analogy to dcc.

Yep~ I think moondog (or maybe another one of us) has pointed out this before, but which date should we use to get Chase exchange rate, and on visaeurope or visa?

I remember it is 9am EST that Chase uses for getting its exchange rate. So presumably, we need to use http://usa.visa.com/personal/card-be...calculator.jsp and set the date to the posting date shown on Chase.com? This time difference stuff is making me crazy...

Also, how to determine the rate if transactions are posted during the weekend? Should we use the Friday rate or Monday rate, or weekends have rate as well?

You've got to remember how extortinate fuel is in many European countries though, most people don't even carry the the £80 or £90 (135 and 155 USD respectively) to fill up their car (I'm lucky if thats enough to fill up my car as Diesel is even more expensive!)! So I don't think paying cash for fuel would catch on! Its not like in the US where you can hand the cashier 40 or 50 dollars and it'll almost fill up a sedan. + A lot of people use cash back credit cards (the Santander 123 World MasterCard and American Express Platinum Cashback card is very popular in the UK), where you get 3% to 5% back on petrol anyway, so you'd still be breaking even. (+ The fact its illegal to charge extra to charge a credit card price for petrol in many EU member states, so its not really an issue).

There are some of those types of cards here, but not everybody has them.

My point is that just like in some cases such as New Jersey where I see more people handing cash over to the attendants because cash = cheaper, I think that if DCC becomes ubiquitous that DCC combined with FTFs will cause many people to avoid using their cards overseas because they'll know cash = cheaper v. credit card = 3-7% higher price. This is exactly the opposite of what Visa/MC want.

If I remember reading correctly, Visa doesn't update the exchange rate over the weekend and on a number of holidays. But for Chase cards you would look to see what the Visa exchange rate is on the posting date for the transaction. Pay no attention to local time or time zones. The only thing that matters is the posting date. So if the transaction posts on July 28th, you would look at the Visa rate for July 28th. I can't speak for other card issuers, but for Chase it's pretty straightforward.

But you've got visa.com and visaeurope.com and they all have the exchange rate information. That's what gets me confused.

I don't know which time zone you are in right now, but if you are in EST 9pm and go to visa.com, you see the latest available date to choose is today. If you go to visaeurope.com, the latest date is tomorrow already.

Therefore, Jul 28th EST might be different from Jul 28th UTC. That's my concern.

Can I assume since Chase is US-based, we can ignore visaeurope.com?

I am not saying anybody is wrong but I'm not completely sold on a couple of things bdeing said here but then again I am not sure. For example, I might make two different charges on the same day with the same card say in London; yet the exchange rates listed on those credit cards which show the exchange rate being used are slightly different. (Not dividing the GBP amount by the USD amount as that is rounded off to the nearest penny and might lead to differences in the third or fourth decimal places). I have always subscribed that to the constant changes during the day of international exchange rates. So for what other reason might the exchange rates be different.

As far as when the conversion is made, I was and still am under the impression the exchange occurs when the charge enters the international visa (or mastercard) network and arrives say at Chase if tghey're the issuer already converted with the 1% markup and then it's up to Chase to decide whether to eat it, pass it along or add 2%. Or perhaps Chase notifies visa inh advance what they wish to do and visa adds on the 1% or 3% as the case may be.

In no way am I saying I know this stuff is true, but that is what I have been led to believe.

To my knowledge, NY is the only state where the courts have thrown out the distinction between a surcharge and a discount. In the rest of the country, there is still a legal distinction and discounts are always lawful. As long as the gasoline retailers portray it as a cash discount rather than a surcharge, it would not be illegal in any state.

I never get Visa rate exactly, but the difference is very insignificant (less than 0.1% either way)

It really depends on the acquirer:
- I used two Visa cards overseas, one issued by two different HK banks, within minutes of each other in same merchant, with same posting date <-- same rate
- I used one Visa card overseas throughout a day in same city. Some transactions were posted on the same day, some on another day. But even the same-card same-day transactions have slightly different rates (one being noticeably different from the others).

So I think the acquirer determines what Visa rate we get, by controlling the time of posting.

And you won't get exact rate either because even if you are in the same timezone as the Visa website, the Thai/Chilean/Australian acquirer isn't.

What I observed is that my two Chase Visa cards (Sapphire Preferred and United Club) will bring slightly different rates even if two transactions are made almost simultaneously, one on each card.

And almost always, United Club card has slightly higher rate (about 0.1% to 0.2%), while Sapphire Preferred usually stick to the rates posted on Visa.com.

I will post some of the transactions here later when I have the time to dig through the statements.

@percysmith: Can I assume, based on your idea, that even though acquirers have control over the posting date, the rate used is still according to Visa/MC (on that day)?

I'm on ET, but the time zone doesn't matter. What matters is the date the transaction posts. It seems to happen at different times depending on the particular Chase card. For instance, CSP updates around 11pm ET with new posted transactions on every day except Saturday. I've noticed this behavior with other Chase cards as well.

I've always used the Visa US rate and have been able to reconcile the posted transaction amount exactly by using the exchange rate for the date the transaction posted. For example:

Date of Transaction
06/06 NANDOS WORLD SQUARE SYDNEY 42.12The posting date was 6/8, so looking at the Visa USA exchange rate on June 8th:

Doing the calculation:

45.00 AUD x 0.936106 USD/AUD = 42.12 USD

There is a slight discrepancy between the Chase rate of 0.936000000 and the Visa rate of 0.936106, but I've never had it impact the calculation of the posted transaction amount.

I think you might be onto something here. I had two transactions both on June 7th according to Chase that posted on June 10th. The earlier one from the afternoon had an exchange rate of AUD:USD of 0.936740262. The later one from dinner had a rate of 0.936742934. The Visa rate for June 10th was 0.936706. In neither case do I get a different result by using the Visa exchange rate, so I think at least for Chase cards it's easy to tell exactly how much the transaction would have been had you used the Visa exchange rate if you get hit with DCC.

Maybe the slightly higher rate I saw on the Club card won't bring the total up either. Thanks for explaining this~

Sydney has Nandos? Nandos the chicken restaurant? My wife loved this in London! We are going to Sydney soon.

Nando's is all over Australia. You should have no problem finding one. The only locations in the US are around DC, so they're not much use if you're on the west coast.

I still can't explain the slight discrepancy in between the listed exchange rates and the official Visa rate unless it's some instantaneous rate that the acquirer pulls from Visa?

and also how public transport is a much better option there (the tube after all is a world class transport system while a comparable option is not available in many, if not most American cities.)

That seems to be the general opinion but outside of London most public transport is shocking in the UK. On weekends a lot of public transport isn't even running. I don't have much better experiences in a lot of other non-capital European cities (although some are good).

Agreed, but it's still a lot better than American public transport. Try public transport here outside of the largest cities.

I suppose it would be better to say "What public transport?" from my experience in the US :P

Thank you! Not long ago a friend of mine was telling me how wonderful it was that BHV in Paris (owned by Galeries Lafayette iirc) could charge her in Australian dollars, therefore saving her oodles of money. Hard as I tried I could not convince her to select euros next time she was faced with DCC. I'm going to commit your post to memory as it explains beautifully and clearly what I was trying to tell her.

Mass transit in Asia, especially Tokyo, Seoul, Taipei, Hong Kong, and Singapore are equally as good as European cities, IMO. And these are actually the cities where mass transit is actually profitable, so much that they are actually list themselves as a for profit corporations (so technically, "public" transit isn't the right word for mass transit in Asia) in their respective stock exchanges because everyone uses transit to get around. Can you imagine the LA Metro, Chicago CTA, or the NYC Metro as a for profit corporation publicly listed on the NYSE? LOL

Me neither, and that is baffling me...

Also, I've pulled some transactions from statements.

Here are the ones from CSP:

05/31 IPPUDO SINGAPORE 38.5206/02 POPEYES CHICKEN & BISCUIT SINGAPORE 12.7705/31 JUMBO SEAFOOD PTE LTD SINGAPORE 94.02Ones from United Club card:

06/01 SINGAPORE ZOO-TICKETING SINGAPORE 102.1805/31 DFS VENTURE S P/L - SCOTT SINGAPORE 37.5206/02 SINGAPORE FLYER PL SINGAPORE 52.6705/31 COLD STORAGE-BJ SINGAPORE 24.58You see for posting date 6/1, Club vs CSP is 0.798297872 / 0.798176543 max, which is 0.015% higher; and for 6/2 is 0.798051948 / 0.797996944 max, which is 0.007% higher. Also, you see Club rates are always higher than CSP, no exceptions.

Visaeurope.com gives 0.7983390000 for 6/1 and 0.7983390000 for 6/2, and Visa.com gives 0.798260 for 6/1 and 0.798260 for 6/2.

I've got one of those too... :D

06/05 IPPUDO AUSTRALIA PTY SYDNEY 73.87Let's compare my use of CSP:

06/06 PAPINELLE PTY LTD PADDINGTON 207.0106/07 PLINE PH WORLD SQ SYDNEY 37.7606/07 FUJIYA JAPANESE REST SYDNEY 69.60with my use of the Marriott Rewards Premier card:

06/08 GUZMAN Y GOMEZ WORLD SYDNEY 22.9506/10 COLES QUEENS PLAZA QLD 13.6406/08 MCDONALDS WYNYARD RAM SYDNEY 7.59The exchange rates on the Marriott card seem to be slightly higher on average than the CSP, and both rates are higher than the Visa USA rate of 0.936106 for June 9th. If you use the June 9th Visa USA rate, you'll get discrepancies for most of the posted transaction amounts. However, if I look at the Account Activity online, I see that all of the transactions actually have a Post Date of June 10th. If instead I use the Visa USA rate for June 10th, which was 0.936706, you will find all of the posted amounts will match if you take each transaction's AUD amount, multiply it by the 0.936706 rate, and round to the nearest cent. It's a bit cumbersome, but I believe this method should work when requesting credit for a forced DCC transaction. In summary for Chase cards:

1. Save your receipt and wait for the transaction to post to the Account Activity online
2. Use the Visa USA exchange rate from the Post Date and multiply the exchange rate by the amount of the local currency on the receipt
3. Subtract the result from the USD amount on your receipt to determine the dollar amount by which you were overcharged due to DCC
4. File a dispute with Chase for this amount and request a Reason Code 76 chargeback stating that you were not offered the option of paying in the local currency

With respect I disagree:

To tell whether you've been DCCed: if card currency amount (us$ in your case) on the slip matches posted amount, DCC.

Reason code 76 chargeback: always ask for full chargeback in the first instance. Never offer to calculate what the amount should have been as it is merchant's obligation to post in local currency properly after chargeback completed. Only where issuer does not offer to chargeback do you accept a calculated settlement.

I'm glad it can provide some talking points for you to try to convince your friend. If you read back a couple of posts, you will find similar stories where a number of us have attempted to convince friends, family and traveling companions to avoid DCC and always request local currency.

I don't know if Australian card issuers use currency conversion fees or foreign transaction fees. In the US, pretty much all issuers now use foreign transaction fees for cards that have them, so you'll get hit with the FTF even if you choose DCC.

A quick way to end any argument with DCC is ask the person why would the merchant be providing such a service if there was no economic benefit to the merchant? There's good money to be made in currency conversion, and you needn't look further than any of the currency exchange booths at an international airport. The merchant provides DCC as a value-added service, and the customer pays a premium for using that service.

I guess zyxlsy have been wasting a lot of time on a pointless exercise. :) You're the expert on Reason Code 76 chargebacks, so in the event I ever have to file one, I will do it for the full amount. I've never pursued a chargeback for DCC, but when I've done domestic transactions in which I've been overcharged the issuer has always asked me by how much. I incorrectly assumed the procedure would be similar for DCC.

But hey... it's not really my job to figure out by how much I've been overcharged with DCC now is it? The merchant brought on this problem, so it's on the merchant to fix it. :p

You've got a big party going to IPPUDO in Sydney, or it costs twice much than Singapore :confused:

Regarding the posting date issue, you are saying even though the posting date listed in the statement is 6/9, it is actually 6/10 by looking at the activities page? I will go back and check it out...

@percysmith: The Chase's online dispute system requires you to input the correct amount for any dispute. Therefore, we were trying to figure out what kind of number we should use.

I haven't tried disputing DCC with Chase for months, as I didn't get many (just one). I don't know whether Chase's system has changed, but I remember I couldn't simply request a "reason code 76 chargeback" without filing a dispute online, thus requiring the "correct amount" as it couldn't be left blank...

zxylsy - oh. I'm not aware Chase's system works like that. In HK we file paper forms and I fill in foreign currency that should have been charged (even if the forms ask for HKD).

That way, the bank has no easy claim to pay me off and have to chargeback the issuer and merchant instead. Which is exactly what I want done.

In Chase's system, it's like they ask for a correct amount, and all the instances I encountered, they just credit you the difference.

So this "correct amount" is kinda important. No so high that we feel guilty, but not so low that we lose money...

Also, having been following your posts, I see you pay particular attention to the difference between being charged in HKD and being charged in foreign currencies. I think this may be because HK banks give extra promo miles for foreign currency charges?

With Chase, it doesn't matter, so whether the merchant charges you which currency, the final number is gonna be USD, whether DCC does that for you, or Visa does that for you. And, the miles we get is only related to the final USD number.

In case you get credit for the DCC difference, you just get less miles according to that difference. It is all post-currency-conversion.

Therefore I don't have the absolute pressure to pursue chargebacks. If the gap is filled by whomever, I am all OK. :D

Yes (many of them):

https://www.redhotoffers.hsbc.com.hk...erchant-offer/

"13.Cardholders...are entitled to receive an extra $1 RewardCash for every HK$20 equivalent spent in respect of each single overseas transaction (as defined in Clause 14)

14.Overseas transactions are transactions conducted outside Hong Kong and in any currency except Hong Kong Dollars. "

http://www.citibank.com.hk/english/c...p=HKENCCPWAGD2

"4. This promotion applies to "Eligible Transactions" made by the Eligible Card during the Promotion Period. Eligible Transactions include

a. "Eligible Local Transactions" which refer to all local retail transactions, monthly installments of the newly-billed interest-free installment plan and cash advances posted during the Promotion Period and made in Hong Kong dollars, Renminbi & Macau Patacas.
b. "Eligible Overseas Transactions" which refer to all overseas retail transactions and cash advances posted during the Promotion Period and made in foreign currencies (excluding Renminbi & Macau Patacas)

5. ...Cardholders...can enjoy the "Promotional Miles Earn Rate" on "Subsequent Local Transactions" or "Subsequent Overseas Transactions" (i.e. HK$5,001 and above subsequent Eligible Transactions) in the same respective phase, as shown below...

...Promotional Miles Earn Rate on Subsequent Local Transactions...HK$5,000 HK$5,001 and above HK$5= 1 Asia Miles


...Promotional Miles Earn Rate on Subsequent Overseas Transactions...HK$5,001 and above HK$2= 1 Asia Miles "

[Also, Citi HK has prohibited the awarding of any points whatsoever on DCC transactions so a HK$ transaction not incurred in HK can be understood to earn no points/miles. That's why I stopped the boat at Taj Exotica Maldives]

By looking at the info, my feeling is that the extra miles for oversea transactions in foreign currency is more like a offset of foreign currency conversion fee, right?

You see, you get 1 HKD for 2 HKD to 20HKD, and the conversion fee is like 2%? 1 for 2 is kind of an earning, but 1 for 20 just covers the conversion fee IMO...

Can I assume HK banks are doing to just to promote oversea usage of their cards? Any other benefits to them?

This is not like cards in the US that rewards has nothing to do with where you spend.

Bit more than offset. Let's just say miles cost a bit under HK$0.07 (US$0.009).

Citi promo: $2/mile = .07/2 = 3.5%
HSBC promo: HK$20 spend = 1 RC = 15 miles = $1.05. $1.05/20 = 5.25%

The fee is 1.95%, of which V/MC takes 1% and banks 0.95%.
Even if RewardCash is exchanged for goods 95% of its face value (they can be exchanged for a form of store credit at supermarkets) then the rebate is still 4.75% > 1.95%.

Hope you can't pay your bill and rack up finance charges I guess.

Or spend so much you bust your promo limits and get ordinary earn at around $1/$250 spend.

I don't think that is a proper use of chargeback. You are only supposed to dispute the cost of goods or services you did not receive as agreed upon. For example, if you book a round trip ticket and the airline goes bankrupt after you use the first segment, you would only chargeback the portion you couldn't use. Since you did receive the goods you wanted to buy but you did not request the service of currency conversion, you should only chargeback the latter.

Nahh.

That's not what the Fair Credit Billing Act says. The entire amount is disputed because the total amount charged is not correct. Charges in the wrong amount are billing error amounts. See, e.g., http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles...t-card-charges.

The FTC site is a tad out of date since the Federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau took over most of the consumer credit card area but it is correct on this. Take a look at the FCBA if you want to know more. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Credit_Billing_Act but remember that it has to be read in conjunction with the relevant Federal Reserve Board Regulations and staff commentary.

Best book in the area (highly technical) is the National Consumer Law Center's Truth in Lending work. http://shop.consumerlaw.org/truthinlending.aspx. Most decent law libraries have a copy.

I'm not even concerned about US law as neither I nor acquirer need to be under US jurisdiction to effect a chargeback.

What you've mentioned is covered by Visa International Operating Regulations Reason Code 30 Services Nor Provided or Merchandise Not Received.

That's one chargeback reason code. There are 21 other chargeback reason codes in the VIOR, including Duplicate Processing, Paid by Other Means, and (most relevant here) Reason Code 76 Incorrect Currency or Transaction Code or Domestic Transaction Processing Violation