What is the difference between Visa codes 10.1 and 10.2?

Both are EMV liability shift disputes, but 10.1 covers counterfeit cards while 10.2 addresses real cards in the wrong hands after loss, theft, or interception in the mail. In a 10.1 the card itself is fake; in a 10.2 the card is genuine but the user is not the cardholder. The winning evidence differs accordingly: chip-read proof for 10.1, PIN-verification proof for 10.2.

Can a merchant win a 10.2 dispute?

Yes, primarily by proving PIN verification succeeded or that the terminal and card combination falls outside the PIN liability shift. Evidence that the true cardholder made the purchase, such as camera footage or a matching signature, can also carry a representment. Without one of those, recovery odds are poor.

Does 10.2 apply in the United States?

The PIN-based liability shift behind 10.2 has historically applied in chip-and-PIN markets, and US issuance has been predominantly chip-and-signature. That makes valid 10.2 disputes less common on US domestic volume, though they do occur with international cards. Always verify the card's CVM preference before conceding.

Visa · Fraud

Reason code 10.2: EMV Liability Shift Non-Counterfeit Fraud

A lost, stolen, or never-received card was used fraudulently at a terminal that did not support the card's PIN verification, shifting liability to the merchant under EMV rules. Unlike 10.1, the physical card here is genuine; the problem is that the person using it was not the cardholder. It applies only to card-present transactions in regions where the PIN liability shift is in effect.

Issuer filing window

120 days from the transaction processing date

Merchant response window

typically 20-30 days to respond, depending on the acquirer

Why 10.2 chargebacks happen

A thief presented a stolen chip-and-PIN card at a terminal with no PIN capability, so the transaction completed without the fraudster ever being challenged for the PIN.
A card intercepted in the mail before the cardholder received it was used for in-store purchases.
The terminal supported chip reads but was not configured for PIN entry, allowing signature or no CVM on a card that should have required a PIN.
A family member or acquaintance used the genuine card without permission and the cardholder reported it as stolen.
The merchant bypassed PIN prompts to speed up checkout lines.

How to fight a 10.2 chargeback

Produce the authorization record showing PIN verification actually occurred; a successful PIN entry defeats the basis of the dispute entirely.
Show that the card was not a PIN-preferring chip card, because the liability shift under 10.2 only applies when the card's CVM list preferred PIN and the terminal could not support it.
Provide evidence identifying the cardholder as the actual purchaser, such as signed receipts, CCTV footage, or loyalty account activity tied to the transaction.
Confirm the transaction region; the PIN liability shift rules differ by market, and a 10.2 filed outside its scope can be challenged on that basis.
Check whether the issuer already exercised a fraud dispute on this transaction under a different code, since only one fraud chargeback per transaction is allowed.

How to prevent 10.2 chargebacks

Enable full chip-and-PIN support on every terminal rather than defaulting to signature or no-CVM flows.
Never override or skip a PIN prompt to speed up a sale, even for regular customers.
Train staff to hold the card and match names on high-value purchases where local rules permit identity checks.
Keep CVM configuration under review with your acquirer whenever terminals are replaced or re-certified.
Flag rapid-fire high-value purchases of resalable goods, which is the classic pattern for stolen-card use.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between Visa codes 10.1 and 10.2?: Both are EMV liability shift disputes, but 10.1 covers counterfeit cards while 10.2 addresses real cards in the wrong hands after loss, theft, or interception in the mail. In a 10.1 the card itself is fake; in a 10.2 the card is genuine but the user is not the cardholder. The winning evidence differs accordingly: chip-read proof for 10.1, PIN-verification proof for 10.2.
Can a merchant win a 10.2 dispute?: Yes, primarily by proving PIN verification succeeded or that the terminal and card combination falls outside the PIN liability shift. Evidence that the true cardholder made the purchase, such as camera footage or a matching signature, can also carry a representment. Without one of those, recovery odds are poor.
Does 10.2 apply in the United States?: The PIN-based liability shift behind 10.2 has historically applied in chip-and-PIN markets, and US issuance has been predominantly chip-and-signature. That makes valid 10.2 disputes less common on US domestic volume, though they do occur with international cards. Always verify the card's CVM preference before conceding.

Related Visa codes