Understanding Mastercard Chargeback Reason Code 4842: Late Presentment

Reason Code 4842 appears when a merchant submits a transaction to the issuer after the network’s allowed timeframe. Even if the payment was authorised at the point of sale, late presentment exposes every party to extra risk. Merchants who process payments days or weeks later risk losing the sale and the goods, and may also incur additional fees.

Key Takeaways

• What it means: The transaction reached the issuer after Mastercard’s deadline.
• Causes: The merchant processed, captured, or batched the transaction too late.
• How to respond: Show that the presentment was on time. Or, show the cardholder account remains open.
• How to prevent: Transmit transactions the same day. Use authorisation holds. Monitor batching schedules.

What is a Mastercard Reason Code 4842 Chargeback?

Note: Reason Code 4842 has now been discontinued and is included under Reason Code 4834. However, the advice below is still relevant to Reason Code 4834 chargebacks relating to late presentment.

A chargeback marked 4842 belongs to Mastercard’s “Point-of-Interaction Error” group. It signals that the acquirer received the transaction well after the network’s cut-off. However, they still sent it forward. Mastercard sets two separate windows. 

• The merchant must complete presentment within 7 calendar days if, during that period, the cardholder account is closed. 
• Presentment must never be more than 180 days from the original purchase date. 

When these time limits lapse, the issuer may reverse the payment under 4842. From the issuer’s view, the delay makes it impossible to confirm that the cardholder had funds or that the account even existed. What it means in practice is simple. Approval at authorisation time does not protect revenue if the clearing file drifts past the deadline. The code usually originates with issuers rather than consumers. The dispute can arise without any preceding cardholder complaint. However, if the merchant can demonstrate timely processing or an active account, they can overturn the chargeback.

Primary Causes for a Code 4842 Chargeback

Late presentment often traces back to everyday operational habits. Merchants who rely on manual batching may overlook holidays or maintenance windows. This can cause files to reach the processor days late. In e-commerce, some sellers use delayed capture to wait for stock, verify delivery costs, or bundle items. If those delays overrun the seven-day window, the issuer sees the presentment as late. 

Hospitality and vehicle hire businesses are at extra risk. An authorisation hold covers the booking, but the final charge arrives only after check-out or return. An extended stay, a car kept for weeks, or a guest’s no-show can push clearing over the limit. Automated systems may mis-sequence cron jobs. This produces logs that show approval, but hide that clearing never happened. 

Although consumers rarely trigger a 4842 claim, they can still contribute. Causes include cancelling the card, reporting it lost, or migrating to a new account number. Once an account is closed, any late item older than seven days becomes invalid by rule. However, merchant workflow (rather than fraud) is the fundamental cause. Fighting a 4842 chargeback requires clear evidence.

Time Limit for Disputing a Mastercard Reason Code 4842 Chargeback

When a 4842 chargeback arrives, the clock starts anew. The acquirer receives the first chargeback message and has forty-five calendar days to send a second presentment. Miss that deadline and the dispute stands. Inside that window, merchants must collect documents that prove compliance with Mastercard rules. 

Acceptable evidence includes settlement reports, gateway timestamps, and processor acknowledgement files. If the merchant relies on the “account still open” defence, they need proof. A letter from the issuer confirming the status during the disputed period is required. Issuers rarely grant extra extensions. 

Merchants should track the day the retrieval hits the bank portal, not the date they first read an email. Fast coordination with the payment processor is essential. Processors often need forty-eight hours to attach clearing data from their archives. A well-organised dispute timeline helps the merchant meet the forty-five-day limit. This increases the likelihood of overturning the chargeback.

What 4842 Means for Consumers & Issuers

For consumers, 4842 is usually invisible. They may never know the code was used because the bank acts on its own audit rather than a customer complaint. The rule protects cardholders by stopping old transactions from reappearing months later. Issuers view the code as a safeguard of account integrity. If a cardholder closes an account, moves to a new BIN, or shifts to a different bank, any late transaction threatens reconciliation. Reversing it under 4842 prevents accounting mismatches and possible regulatory questions. 

For issuers, it provides a quick and precise mechanism to reject out-of-bounds transactions. It demonstrates to Mastercard that they are policing network rules. It also saves them time investigating goods, services, or consumer intent. The bank can refund the cardholder immediately and avoid provisional credit extensions.

What 4842 Means for Merchants

For merchants, code 4842 is a red flag that internal settlement processes may leak revenue. Losing both the funds and the shipped product cuts into your margin. The merchant pays chargeback fees and may face higher rolling reserves if dispute ratios rise. Repeated timing errors also damage acquirer relationships. This can increase processing costs or trigger early-warning programmes. 

Late presentment also undermines customer trust. A shopper who spots a charge weeks later might suspect fraud, submit their own dispute, or leave negative reviews. All of these soft-cost effects compound the direct financial hit. To protect revenue, merchants should map every payment route. Identify where authorisation turns into capture, and align that step within the seven-day rule. Automated reconciliation, daily batch reports, and exception dashboards help spot potential late presentments.

How to Respond to a Code 4842 Chargeback

Responding begins with a simple question: Did the merchant meet Mastercard’s deadline? If the answer is yes, the defence must focus on documentary proof. Download the acquirer clearing file that shows the clearing date. Pair it with the original authorisation log. Ensure it has the same amount, card number suffix, and transaction identifier. Present both within forty-five days. If the issuer alleges the account was closed, ask the acquirer to query the issuer for confirmation. 

Sometimes the account was only temporarily blocked due to a lost card report. In that case, show a bank letter stating the account was active when clearing occurred. If the merchant missed the window, the correct approach is to accept the chargeback. Any attempt to fight without a valid basis wastes time, fees, and acquirer goodwill. Once the case is closed, review why the batch failed: human delay, system outage, or policy. Deploy a fix before the pattern repeats.

Proactive Prevention: The Ultimate Defence

The best defence against 4842 is rapid, predictable clearing. Capture transactions the same day. When that is not practical, use an authorisation hold and reauthorise if seven days elapse. Monitor stock and booking systems so orders are not held indefinitely. Reconcile batch logs daily. Audit processor acknowledgements each morning. To add an early warning system, merchants can try out chargeback alerts. These flag incoming disputes as they are raised by issuers or cardholders. This gives you valuable extra time to respond before a chargeback is finalised.