Alert on any chargeback or dispute the moment it is opened, routed to a named person rather than a finance inbox. Disputes carry a response deadline, and the evidence you need is markedly easier to collect in the first days than in the last ones. The common failure is not losing the case, it is missing the window entirely.
Why this one is worth an interruption
A chargeback has a clock on it that nobody in the store set and nobody can extend. Missing the deadline loses the money without anybody ever deciding to concede it.
The evidence is also perishable in practice. Delivery confirmation, the conversation with the customer, the fraud indicators at the time of the order: all of it is findable now and progressively more annoying to assemble later.
The threshold
There is no threshold. The settings that matter are about escalation and pattern.
| Condition | Set it to | Why that number |
|---|---|---|
| Trigger | dispute opened | The clock starts here, not when you notice |
| Deadline reminder | halfway to the response date | The second reminder is the one that gets acted on |
| Value flag | above a material amount | Decides whether it is worth contesting at all |
| Pattern flag | same product 3 times in 90 days | Points at a description or quality problem |
Who should receive it
A named person, because a finance inbox is where deadlines go to expire.
- Whoever assembles dispute evidence. One person, so the process is learned rather than reinvented.
- Whoever handled the original order, if there was a conversation worth including.
- The owner, above a material value, to decide whether contesting is worth the time.
What to do when it fires
- Gather the evidence set now rather than near the deadline: delivery confirmation, the order's risk indicators, and any customer correspondence.
- Decide explicitly whether to contest or concede. Conceding on purpose is a legitimate choice; conceding by expiry is not.
- Check whether the same product has produced disputes before.
- If a pattern exists, fix the description or the delivery estimate that is generating it, rather than contesting each one.
When not to set this alert
There is no good reason to turn this off, but there is a good reason to keep it narrow: it should go to one person, not to a team, because a deadline owned by several people is owned by none.
If your payment provider already sends these to an individual who acts on them, you do not need a second alert. Verify that is actually happening before assuming it.
Common questions
How long do I have to respond to a chargeback?
It varies by payment provider and card scheme, and the deadline is set by them rather than by you. Check the specific window in your provider's dispute notice, and set a reminder at the halfway point rather than near the end.
What evidence should I collect?
Delivery confirmation, the order's original risk indicators, and any correspondence with the customer. All of it is easier to find in the first days than in the last.
What if the same product keeps generating disputes?
Treat that as a product-page problem rather than a series of individual cases. A misleading description or an unrealistic delivery estimate produces disputes indefinitely until it is changed.