Understanding Mastercard Chargeback Reason Code 4808: Authorisation

Reason code 4808 covers situations where a transaction was processed without a valid Mastercard authorisation approval. When this happens, the issuer may reverse the sale and debit the merchant. Knowing the causes, deadlines, and remedies helps merchants protect revenue and minimise disputes.

Key Takeaways

‍

• What it means: A sale went through even though the issuer never gave (or later withdrew) authorisation.
• Causes: Missing, late, or overridden authorisation requests. Repeated attempts after a decline. Use of non-EMV terminals.
• How to respond: Show proof of timely approval, a valid account, or a prior refund. Submit within 45 days.
• How to prevent: Obtain approval for every sale. Keep EMV hardware up to date. Monitor declines with real-time tools.

‍

What is a Mastercard Reason Code 4808 Chargeback?

Reason code 4808 sits in Mastercard’s “Authorisation-related” category. It applies when the issuer can show that the transaction lacked a proper approval request at the moment of purchase. It may also indicate the request was sent after clearing. In plain terms, the card’s bank never said “yes” before the money left the cardholder’s account. The issuer must first try to honour the sale. If that fails, it may raise a chargeback under this code, shifting liability to the acquirer and the merchant. 

‍

Sub-codes provide extra context, such as “Account Number Not on File”, “Requested/Required Authorisation Not Obtained”, or “Warning Bulletin File”. Each points to the same core problem: the merchant relied on an invalid or missing approval and therefore carries the loss. For e-commerce sellers, this often emerges when a payment gateway forces a sale after a soft decline. For card-present outlets, the risk rises when staff swipe or key a chip card instead of dipping it, bypassing online checks. 

‍

Note: Mastercard has merged several older chargeback reason codes into 4808. These include:

• 4807: previously used for "Warning Bulletin File"
• 4812: previously used for "Account Number Not On File"
• 4847: previously used for "Requested/Required Authorisation Not Obtained"

‍

Primary Causes for a Code 4808 Chargeback

Most 4808 disputes trace back to one of three operational missteps. First, the merchant never asked for authorisation at all. This can happen with manual key-entry, malfunctioning terminals, or flawed API calls that skip the approval step. Second, the merchant did request approval, but only after the clearing message, such as when a batch is held offline and submitted days later. 

‍

Mastercard rules consider late requests invalid because the card’s status may have changed in the meantime. Third, the merchant overrode repeated declines by running the card again, forcing it through a backup service. Fraud also plays a role: criminals look for shops without EMV readers, where a swipe avoids chip-based confirmation. In every scenario, the link is clear: no green light from the issuer means no guaranteed payment.

‍

Time Limit for Disputing a Mastercard Reason Code 4808 Chargeback

Once a 4808 dispute appears, the clock starts. Issuers have up to 90 calendar days from the processing date to file the chargeback. After it lands, the acquirer forwards it to the merchant. From that point, the merchant has 45 calendar days to reply. Missing this window means the case closes automatically in the cardholder’s favour, and the funds never return. 

‍

Merchants should therefore track dispute alerts daily and gather evidence quickly. This ensures they can submit a clear, concise package before the deadline. Late responses are one of the most common reasons for failure. Set internal reminders and assign responsibility to a specific team member. Using automated dispute-management software can help meet deadlines even during peak seasons.

‍

What 4808 Means for Consumers & Issuers

Reason code 4808 provides valuable protection for cardholders. It prevents loss of funds if a merchant ignores or bypasses the bank’s decision. When the chargeback is filed, the issuer credits the cardholder immediately. However, if cardholders falsely assert that a transaction was unauthorised, this credit may be reversed. This occurs when the issuer later receives evidence of authorisation (from the merchant or during their own checks).

‍

For issuers, this code is key to maintaining network integrity. When rules around authorisation are broken, cardholders are protected from liability. However, issuers are still required to ensure the validity of any 4808 claim. They are responsible for checking that no approval code exists or that the code arrived outside the permitted timeframe. Issuers are also obliged to make an attempt to post the transaction first. This rule is designed to reduce the number of unnecessary disputes that arise.

‍

What 4808 Means for Merchants

Beyond the loss of revenue, merchants may face extra fees from the acquirer and risks to their chargeback ratio. Reaching network thresholds can trigger monitoring programmes. This can lead to fines, higher processing costs, or even account termination. As well as the immediate financial cost, merchants are impacted in other ways. Retrieving stock shipped to a fraudster can be extremely difficult, if not impossible. And from a brand perspective, customer trust can be damaged if legitimate buyers see repeated billing errors. 

‍

For merchants, this type of chargeback usually suggests a process or workflow issue is to blame. Outdated terminals or misconfigured payment gateways can be a trigger. There may also be human error involved, such as when staff retry declined cards. Receiving one or more 4808 chargebacks should serve as a reminder to audit payment processes and retrain employees if needed.

‍

How to Respond to a Code 4808 Chargeback

There are four main defences to this type of chargeback. Start by identifying which case applies to the dispute at hand, and gather the relevant proof in good time. It's crucial to submit your response before the deadline to have a chance of winning.

‍

If authorisation was approved before clearing, the claim can be overturned. Send proof of the six-digit approval code, timestamp, and transaction log. If clearing occurred after approval, show it was within 7 days (30 for pre-authorised transactions). If the account number was valid at the time of sale, you can supply screenshots from gateway logs or receipts as evidence. And, if you already processed a refund, supply the credit memo and bank record to prove this occurred. It's not worth disputing a 4808 chargeback if the evidence clearly shows missing or late approval. It's better to accept liability straight away, which can avoid fees piling up and keep your business on good terms wth issuers.

‍

Proactive Prevention: The Ultimate Defence

Stopping 4808 disputes starts with consistent, real-time authorisation. Use fully EMV-compliant hardware, update gateway software, and block forced transactions. Deploy decline-management rules so staff never retry a hard decline. Keep batch times short and settle within seven days. For extra peace of mind, try out chargeback alerts. They flag at-risk transactions before they escalate, letting you refund or clarify while time is still on your side.