[charcircuit]

Why would the card providers be in the customer's favor. The customer paid for a text to be delivered to a phone number and Twilio did that and then charged the customer for it.

If you pay someone to mow your lawn, then they mow your lawn and charge you. You can't just chargeback after the fact to get that service for free.

[0x62]

In your analogy it would be more like paying someone to mow your lawn because your neighbour got it done for $10, then being charged $100 because your house number is even.

It might be in the terms and conditions, but it’s bad faith to not give any warnings or controls before the services are rendered.

[charcircuit]

Except in that metaphor every service on your property costs 10x the price and it's a well known fact.

[8n4vidtmkvmk]

if they mow your lawn 10 times in a row and bill you 10 times... you should charge back 9 of them

[dahfizz]

Is that what's happening? You ask twilio to send one text and they send ten?

[aaaaaA3]

The people adjudicating disputes at card companies are akin to content moderators hired by social media companies, they aren't experts and do not spend much time reading up on the dispute. The decisions are more or less random, with a heavy bias towards the customer.