Online transaction declined due to wrong CVC/CVV and then authorised - who is responsible

rflook

Hi, hoping someone can help me with a dispute where my bank and a merchant are blaming each other.
I attempted to make a purchase online and used my old CVC/CVV, which generated a notification on my phone saying transaction decline due to incorrect 3 digit code. So I recreated the order this time using the correct code. In the meantime, the originally cancelled order had been authorised. After speaking to my bank, they said that the original payment was declined, but the merchant tried again and because the details (bar the CVC/CVV ) were correct and matched my address, the payment went through? 

So whose responsibility is it that the declined transaction went through? I would have thought it was the bank as they clearly had the power to decline the transaction in the first place and then allow it through even after it had been correctly declined in the first place.  

born_again

The retailer as they processed it.
Bank declined it. Retailer pushed it through. CVV is not a totally required part of online purchases.

Teapot55

There was a post on here about dodgy cabs accepting a card payment even though the wrong cvc was deliberately entered because really they were cloning the card, not taking a payment. I guess though that can’t happen remotely?

DCFC79

SebastianQuinng said:

Without the authorization of the bank, the operation would have occurred, the bank is to blame, I think so.

Thread is from November.

A_Lert

Old thread but whatever.

rflook did you suffer any loss from this. For example a non-refundable purchase, or return shipping costs for an unwanted duplicate item.

born_again

SebastianQuinng said:

Without the authorization of the bank, the operation would have occurred, the bank is to blame, I think so.

As above is a old thread.
No. Retailer fault. Bank declined, retailer re processed without CVV (as they can do). 
One reason you should always check a retailer will not reprocess a transaction before doing it again.

Sandtree

born_again said:
Bank declined, retailer re processed without CVV (as they can do). 

Is authorisation even a requirement? Last time I dealt with payments it was very expensive if you weren't going to be using AVS, CVV etc but in theory authorisation was optional and you could go straight to collection. Has that changed?

pbartlett

this has come up a couple of times before - the retailer putting the transaction through without the cvv - i think what is missing is notifying the customer and/or education as i bet if you asked 'down the pub' 90% would say without the cvv a transaction cannot go through.

born_again

Sandtree said:

born_again said:
Bank declined, retailer re processed without CVV (as they can do). 

Is authorisation even a requirement? Last time I dealt with payments it was very expensive if you weren't going to be using AVS, CVV etc but in theory authorisation was optional and you could go straight to collection. Has that changed?

Most go for authorisation. There are floor limits. But even then they still go through banks security systems. 
TBH. Not seen a unauthorised transaction for years.