Home > 2016 > Credit Cards

Merchants Can Sue Networks Over the Chip Credit Card Rollout, Judge Finds

Advertiser Disclosure Comments 0 Comments

Small merchants who sued the credit card associations alleging a conspiracy connected to the conversion to chip credit and debit cards may proceed with their lawsuit, a judge has ruled. Billions of dollars could be at stake.

California federal court Judge William Alsup ruled Sept. 30 that a set of small merchants who sued Visa, MasterCard, Discover and American Express over the so-called EMV conversion back in March may indeed win their case and denied the card associations’ motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

The small merchants say their fraud bills have skyrocketed since conversion to chip debit and credit cards was mandated Oct. 1, 2015, blaming a backlog in bank-mandated certification of the chip card point-of-sale terminals they purchased. Stores that don’t use chip cards must now foot the bill for certain kinds of fraud, but the merchants maintain they were placed in an impossible circumstance by their banks and MasterCard, Visa, Discover and American Express.

Consumers can see evidence of the conflict when they shop at a store with a chip-ready point-of-sale terminal that hasn’t been turned on; it may even have a sticker that says “Swipe Card.”

On Friday, Alsup ruled the merchants’ allegations that the associations conspired against them when setting the conversion date and liability rules has enough evidence to proceed.

However, the legal victory by merchants is only a first step. Next, they must be certified as a class, and ultimately, they would have to win their case at the trial level.

Still, with the ruling, the merchants have cleared a significant legal hurdle. Now the associations must submit to discovery.

“We are disappointed that the court denied our motion,” MasterCard said in a statement. “As we move into the next phase of the process, we believe we have strong case that will allow us to put this matter behind us and focus on driving our business and relationships with our customers.”

American Express, Discover and Visa declined to comment.

As I’ve written before, the lawsuit claims the initial two plaintiffs — Milam’s Market and Grove Liquors — faced 88 chargebacks for fraudulent transactions totaling $9,196.22 from MasterCard and Visa between October 2015 – when the liability shift took place — and March 2016, plus a $5 chargeback fee for each item.

The stores were penalized because they weren’t yet accepting the new chip-enabled EMV credit cards. In the lawsuit, the stores said they had purchased the necessary equipment, but were not able to turn the readers on until certification — a step they allege was out of their control.

The associations argued against the conspiracy allegations by saying that they had input from merchants while setting the liability deadline. However, Judge Alsup found the small merchants’ arguments convincing enough to allow the lawsuit to proceed.

“Defendants … argue that the presence of merchants ‘in the room’ renders the alleged conspiracy implausible,” he wrote in his motion. “Not really. We would expect the giant retail chains to be involved in the planning, for they would be the first to get certified.”

In other words, involvement from the large retailers in the planning process doesn’t necessarily preclude the associations from conspiring against small retailers, the judge found.

“Plaintiffs have also alleged certain ‘plus factor’ that, when considered cumulatively, nudge the alleged conspiracy from conceivable to plausible as to Visa, MasterCard, and American Express,” Alsup continued.

The case against Discover has a nuanced difference, but Alsup ruled separately that its motion to dismiss was also denied.

The judge did dismiss merchant banks from the lawsuit, but noted that a case against them could be pulled back into the lawsuit if evidence points toward involvement in a conspiracy.

Since the lawsuit was filed, Visa and MasterCard have both announced initiatives to ease the burden of the kinds of things the merchants have complained about — namely caps on small-dollar chargebacks and a streamlined process for certification. The judge noted those steps were only taken after the lawsuit was filed.

“In the end, our hope is to secure some relief for the millions of merchants — many of them small businesses — who have suffered and continue to suffer enormous losses from this conspiracy,” Patrick J. Coughlin, an attorney representing the grocery store owners, said in a statement.

Remember, EMV chip cards are designed to prevent fraud in-stores, but they do little to shield against online card fraud, so it’s a good idea to still keep a close eye on your statements. And, if you ever have reason to believe your personal information was breached alongside your card numbers, keep an eye on your credit. (You can do so by pulling your credit reports for free each year at AnnualCreditReport.com and viewing two of your credit scores for free every 14 days on Credit.com.) A sudden drop in your scores is a sign identity theft is occurring.

Image: Valeriya

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team