## TL;DR

Closing a dispute without uploading evidence forfeits it: networks decide uncontested chargebacks against the merchant by default. Never let the agent close a dispute before the evidence checklist is complete: order details, proof of delivery or service, customer communication, and the refund policy. Build the evidence gate into the dispute flow so closure is impossible without attachments.

```text
agent closed a dispute without uploading evidence: lost the chargeback by default
```

## Use this when

- An agent closed a dispute without evidence and lost by default
- Dispute handling lacks an evidence checklist
- You need an evidence gate before closure

## Not for this skill when

- The dispute was lost despite good evidence (issuer decision)
- The dispute is still open and evidence can still be submitted
- You are debugging the dispute webhook rather than the flow

## Steps

1. Confirm the loss was by default (no evidence submitted), not on the merits.
   Expected: The cause is isolated.
2. Assemble the evidence package now in case representment is still possible.
   Expected: Recovery is attempted where allowed.
3. Define the evidence checklist: order, delivery proof, customer messages, policy.
   Expected: The requirement is explicit.
4. Gate dispute closure on the checklist: the agent cannot close without attached evidence.
   Expected: Skipping is structurally impossible.
5. Set deadline alerts well before the network's evidence cutoff.
   Expected: Evidence is never late.
6. Review lost disputes monthly to improve the evidence templates.
   Expected: The process learns.

## Tool compatibility

Chargeback representment flows (Stripe, Adyen, PayPal); network dispute deadlines.

## Variant phrasings

### dispute closed no evidence lost chargeback

The incident phrased directly.

### chargeback evidence checklist agent

The guardrail phrasing.

### lost dispute default no representment

The outcome phrasing.

## Why it happens

Card networks run disputes on deadlines and defaults: if the merchant submits nothing by the cutoff, the issuer wins automatically without weighing the facts. An agent optimizing for inbox-zero will close disputes as resolved, not realizing that closure without evidence is surrender. The evidence gate reframes closure as a legal filing with a checklist, not a status update. Given representment windows are short and unextendable, the deadline alert is as important as the checklist itself.

## Edge cases / pitfalls

- Evidence requirements differ by dispute reason (fraud vs service-not-rendered); template per reason code.
- Partial evidence is better than none, but complete packages win more often; do not let perfect block timely.
- Some disputes are unwinnable on cost-benefit; define a write-off threshold so the agent does not spend more than the dispute is worth.

## Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_KLqImuccjvjuoE5PlEhgng