I assume if you are running multiple SaaS you already discovered this - but the expectation is that you will amortize the cost of a chargeback into your price if you are a legit business.

Card-not-present (I.E. internet transaction) has a lot more merchant fraud then friendly fraud (what we call these cases) and the incentives for both merchants and banks is to make sure the customer never loses trust in the system. If people were afraid to use their cards on the internet everyone loses.

It doesn't make sense for both the merchants and the banks to arbitrate every 10$ transaction. I doubt your case even reached a human, or if it did they even gave it a minute of thought - you are just someone who does not know the rules to them.

Now if a customer abuses the chargeback mechanism, he'll have is card revoked, probably be blacklisted and his life would be an insane amount of complicated from now on. But you'll never see these cases. Be sure that if someone could abuse the chargeback mechanism to the extent you mentioned, the system would be unusable, the fact you get chargebacks only rarely is a testemant that there is policing going on at the bank side.

It's just not 100%. Like Patio11 says - the optimal amount of fraud is non-zero[1]

If you have a large chargeback (let's say 1000$ and more) you might actually get someone to review it, and there's a slight chance you'll win if the case is good. But the system is not geared for that.

It's geared towards you amortizing the cost of chargeback into your price - and eventually the people who pay it is always the customer, not the merchant.

[1] - https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fra...

Thanks for sharing. Appreciate.