Not legal or financial advice. This page is not a substitute for your processor's dispute console, card-network fraud reason codes, acquirer playbooks, a licensed attorney, or your judgment. It describes a merchant ritual: use Pingpong to write your fraud / unauthorized dispute description and pressure-test evidence before you submit. Nothing here coaches cardholders on filing fraud claims, inventing unauthorized use, or keeping goods they reverse.
A fraud-shaped notice arrives with a reason code that sounds like theft. Ops hears "friendly fraud." Support hears "they used it." Finance hears the fee. One model already offered a three-paragraph lecture about how chargebacks abuse merchants. The submit button is still the next social act. That is the moment this page is for.
People searching how to respond to a fraud claim, unauthorized transaction dispute response, or friendly fraud chargeback rebuttal usually get template PDFs that argue outrage. Outrage is not evidence. This page is narrower. It treats the fraud reply as a written object that must map to authorization, delivery or access proof, and what the buyer could have done, without inventing biometrics you do not have.
This is distinct from respond to a chargeback (general respond / represent ritual across codes) and from compelling evidence for chargebacks (how to pack evidence for any code). Fraud / unauthorized is a claim type with its own soft-proof failure modes. Primary writing ritual: write your dispute description. CASE MAKER letterhead PDF path (first PDF free, then $9/PDF or 5-pack $29 when export ships): win disputes. Hub: dispute cases. Buyer-side pause lives elsewhere: before you file a chargeback.
Use Pingpong to write your dispute description. Paste the fraud or unauthorized reason code, order facts, authorization notes you are allowed to store, fulfillment or access proof, customer communications, and the deadline. Default chain: Grok, then Perplexity, then ChatGPT, then Gemini, then Claude. Later labs challenge soft AVS claims, missing receipt proof, and tone that lectures the cardholder. Brand: Pingpong at pingpongit.com. Not getpingpong.ai.
Definition: What is Pingpong. Mechanism: How it works. Founders: For founders.
Your first eligible web review is free. Web Plus $19.99/month, web Pro $124.99/month. iOS: three free Pingpongs, then Plus $24.99/month or Pro $59.99/month. Start free on pingpongit.com. Full table: pricing.
Pays-for-itself framing: defending one mid-ticket fraud dispute you would otherwise accept can cover a long stretch of Plus. No win-rate promises. Evidence quality only.
Fraud claims are a different social object than "product not received"
Unauthorized / fraud codes ask whether the cardholder authorized the sale and whether you can show receipt, access, or a pattern that fits a real customer. Product-not-received and not-as-described packs answer a different story. Operators who paste a shipping rant into a fraud case miss the authorization question. Operators who restate AVS/CVV as identity proof for every fraud code overclaim what those signals mean.
What usually breaks fraud replies: calling the buyer a liar without delivery or login proof; treating label-created as delivered; ignoring that a family member or employee may have used a card on file; uploading internal Slack notes the buyer never saw; missing the reply window while waiting for a perfect PDF; mixing Visa 10.x language into a Mastercard or Amex fraud notice without reading the live checklist.
Hard line: legitimate merchant defense of real sales only. If the charge was wrong or unauthorized in a way you cannot honestly defend, refund and close. Do not run fiction through the chain. No coaching to deny valid unauthorized claims.
The merchant ritual before Submit on a fraud notice
Read the reason code and the processor's fraud evidence checklist. Gather what you can prove: authorization data you may store, AVS/CVV results as supporting notes not as identity theater, IP/device signals where relevant, delivery confirmation to the address on file, login or usage logs for digital goods, prior customer history that is real, cancel or refund attempts, policy language the buyer saw. Restate the claim in the cardholder's words. Draft a short dispute description that answers unauthorized use without insult. Run Pingpong on the draft plus the evidence inventory. Edit. Upload. Submit before the deadline.
Compelling pack language: compelling evidence for chargebacks. Network maps when the notice carries a stamp: Visa chargeback reason codes, Mastercard chargeback reason codes. Amex-shaped sibling: Amex dispute evidence. Related irreversible-submit habit: Catch AI mistakes before you commit.
How the five-model handoff works on a fraud claim
Example shape: Processor PROCESSOR, reason code CODE (fraud / unauthorized), amount AMOUNT, order ORDER_ID, cardholder claim summary TEXT, authorization notes LIST, fulfillment or access proof LIST, prior customer history NOTES, deadline DATE. Write my merchant fraud dispute description, map each paragraph to the unauthorized claim, and list evidence to upload versus omit. Flag soft AVS-only claims and missing receipt proof. Do not invent proof I did not list. Do not paste full PAN, CVV, bank passwords, or government IDs you are not allowed to store.
Grok drafts. Perplexity through Claude review in sequence. You leave with a tighter description and a gap list. Architecture: Sequential vs parallel AI. Framing: AI second opinion. Debias: Debias AI.
Letterhead PDF path (and what is live today)
Today Pingpong writes and pressure-tests the dispute description and checklist you paste into your processor. The CASE MAKER lander for a letterhead evidence pack outline is win disputes: first PDF free, then $9/PDF or 5-pack $29 when export ships. One-click PDF export is not a live product button today. Do not delay a ticking fraud case waiting for it. Use the sequential review now; assemble files in the console you already have. Existing API orientation: developer docs.
When to skip
Skip for pocket-change accepts, counsel-owned cases, and clear unauthorized use with no compelling evidence where the honest move is accept or refund. Save the free eligible review for mid-ticket and high-ticket fraud notices where your first draft still confuses AVS match with identity proof, or delivery proof is soft and you almost submitted it as-is.
Related
Hub: dispute cases. Write the response: write your dispute description. CASE MAKER: win disputes. Compelling pack: compelling evidence for chargebacks. Neighbors: respond to a chargeback, respond to a retrieval request, Amex dispute evidence, dispute representment. Processors: Stripe, Braintree, PayPal, Shopify. Network maps: Visa, Mastercard. Buyer-side distinct: before you file a chargeback. Pricing.
Run it before you submit the fraud response
Restate reason code, unauthorized claim, evidence inventory, and deadline as one question: write and pressure-test my fraud dispute description. Run Pingpong once. Keep survivors. Confirm in the processor UI. Start free on pingpongit.com, then Plus or Pro if the ritual sticks (web $19.99 / $124.99; iOS $24.99 / $59.99). Or the App Store.
Again: not legal or financial advice. Merchant-side defense and evidence quality only. No consumer fraud-claim coaching.