Unauthorized charge to credit card

[[email protected]]

We recently purchased an item from a store and used our credit card as a deposit. We paid the balance in full in cash and received a receipt. However, six months later, they charged our card for the balance they said was never paid. They had pulled the previous charge and manually entered the card information. The support documentation provided to the credit card company said "signature on file" (which was actually only the first signed deposit credit card slip). We had given them no "authorization" to make further charges.

We disputed with the credit card company and showed all the documentation. They reversed the charges, however, is there any restitution for the fact that they fraudulently charged our card without our authorization? I just don't think it is fair that large companies can just arbitrarily "charge" without written authorization.

Please advise. Thanks!

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

We recently purchased an item from a store and used our credit card as a deposit. We paid the balance in full in cash and received a receipt. However, six months later, they charged our card for the balance they said was never paid. They had pulled the previous charge and manually entered the card information. The support documentation provided to the credit card company said "signature on file" (which was actually only the first signed deposit credit card slip). We had given them no "authorization" to make further charges.

We disputed with the credit card company and showed all the documentation. They reversed the charges, however, is there any restitution for the fact that they fraudulently charged our card without our authorization? I just don't think it is fair that large companies can just arbitrarily "charge" without written authorization.

Please advise. Thanks!

My response:

Sometimes billing and bookkeeping mistakes occur. It happens all the time. But, assuming you did have a "Cause of Action", you would probably lose because you have sustained no damages as a result - - at least, you didn't mention any. Courts do not indulge cases like this on the "It's the principle of the matter" type bloodlettings.

As the old saying goes, "No harm, no foul".

IAAL