How to Use Usage Logs to Win SaaS Chargebacks

Who This Is For

This guide is for SaaS founders, product managers, support leads, and finance teams who face disputes where customers claim they didn’t use or authorize a subscription purchase. If you sell access to software, APIs, or digital services and need to assemble subscription usage evidence quickly and persuasively, this guide shows exactly which usage logs to gather, how to format them for disputes, and how to craft a narrative that connects the logs to the transaction.

What This Dispute Means

When a cardholder files a chargeback against a SaaS subscription, the issuer is usually contesting one of a few assertions: the customer didn't authorize the charge, the customer didn't receive the service, or the customer claims the service was materially different than advertised. In SaaS contexts, the most useful counter-evidence is objective usage data: who logged in, when, from where, what features were used, API activity, and any downloadable content delivered. This is often called “subscription usage evidence” or “saas chargeback usage logs.”

Put simply: you rebut a claim that someone didn’t use or receive the product by showing verifiable, time-stamped activity tied to the account and transaction.

Evidence Checklist

• Account-level metadata: account ID, email, billing email, customer name as on the transaction.
• Transaction record: transaction ID, charge amount, timestamp, payment method token, invoice or receipt PDF.
• Authentication and access logs: login timestamps (UTC), IP addresses, user-agent strings, MFA events (if applicable).
• Feature usage logs: records of feature names or endpoints accessed, timestamps, and any identifiers for resources created/edited.
• API usage logs: API keys or client IDs used, endpoint paths, HTTP methods, response status codes, bytes transferred.
• Download/export logs: file names, sizes, checksum/hash if available, download timestamps, destination IPs.
• Session recordings or screen captures (if privacy and consent allow): excerpts showing the account in use around the charge time.
• Support interactions: tickets, chat transcripts, emails, and their timestamps showing the customer's recognition of the account or asking for help.
• Subscription lifecycle events: subscription activation, renewal, cancellation requests (with timestamps and actor ID).
• Payment authorization evidence: authorization code, 3DS result, or payment gateway confirmation.

Step-by-Step to Win

1. Identify the dispute type and gather core documents
   1. Open your processor's dispute notification and read the reason text carefully.
   2. Export the transaction receipt, invoice, and any payment gateway authorization details.
2. Collect account and identity logs
   1. Export account profile metadata (email, signup IP, verify methods) as a single JSON or CSV.
   2. Pull authentication logs for the 30–90 day window around the charge—timestamped, IP, user-agent, and MFA events.
3. Export feature usage and API call history
   1. Query your analytics or logging system for feature events, including event name, user identifier, timestamp, and event properties.
   2. Include API request/response summaries: endpoint, method, status code, request ID, timestamp.
4. Prepare download and delivery proof
   1. If your product delivers digital files, export download logs with filename, checksum, and destination IP.
   2. If your product delivers rendered content (PDF reports, exports), attach the generated file or a screencap of the delivered content, with generation timestamps.
5. Format evidence for human and machine review
   1. Create a plain-language executive summary linking the charge to the usage timeline.
   2. Attach raw logs as CSV or JSON and compress them into a single archive labeled clearly with transaction ID and date range.
6. Draft the narrative and map logs to claims
   1. Write a chronological story: signup -> authorization -> usage -> renewal/cancellation — showing actions by the account holder.
   2. For each claim the cardholder made, cite the exact log lines (with timestamps) that rebut it.
7. Sanitize sensitive data and obey privacy rules
   1. Mask full card numbers, redact personal data where not necessary, and note what was redacted in the submission.
   2. Confirm you have a lawful basis to submit logs, especially if they include third-party personal data.
8. Submit through the processor portal and monitor case threads
   1. Upload the summary, attachments, and a labeled manifest listing each file and its purpose.
   2. Watch for follow-up requests and be ready to provide additional context (e.g., trace IDs, expanded time ranges).
9. Maintain an internal post-mortem log
   1. Record what evidence you submitted and the outcome for future improvements to logging retention and export procedures.

Common Mistakes

• Submitting raw logs with no human-readable summary — banks need a clear narrative first, attachments second.
• Providing incomplete timestamps or mismatched time zones that make the timeline ambiguous.
• Forgetting to include API request IDs or transaction IDs that tie a log line to a payment gateway record.
• Overloading the response with irrelevant logs — more is not better if it buries the critical lines.
• Failing to redact sensitive payment data or personal identifiers when unnecessary, which can complicate processing.
• Neglecting to show delivery artifacts for digital products (e.g., exported file, checksum) when claiming a download occurred.
• Relying on aggregated or sampled analytics instead of verbatim event logs that show exact timestamps and IPs.
• Using vague language in the narrative—avoid phrases like “user likely” or “probably” and instead point to exact log entries.

Example Narrative Outline

Below is a clear, evidence-focused structure to follow in your dispute rebuttal. Keep it short, factual, and tied to specific log entries.

1. Introduction (1–2 paragraphs)

   State who you are, the transaction ID, the charge date, and the claim being disputed (e.g., "cardholder claims unauthorized/never received").

2. Summary of key facts

   Bullet the three strongest facts: successful payment authorization, account authentication, and recorded usage post‑charge.

3. Detailed timeline

   Provide a chronological list with timestamps (UTC) showing signup, payment authorization, logins, feature/API calls, and downloads. Cite file names in attachments (e.g., logs-transaction-12345.csv: line 102).

4. Evidence attachments index

   List each file you attached, its format, and what it proves (e.g., "auth-logs.json — shows successful MFA at 2025-03-14T12:02:17Z from IP x.x.x.x").

5. Conclusion

   State concisely why the logs rebut the cardholder’s claim and offer to provide more traces on request.

Processor/Platform/Industry Specifics

Because processors and card networks have different intake systems and naming conventions, follow these platform-agnostic practices and consult your processor for any template preferences:

• Keep a single manifest file (manifest.txt or manifest.pdf) describing every attachment by file name, format, time zone, and purpose — this reduces confusion for reviewers.
• For gateways or processors that accept CSV/JSON, include both: a human-readable PDF summary and raw CSV/JSON logs for machine verification.
• Time zones: always present timestamps in UTC and, if helpful, include the merchant’s local time in parentheses. State clearly that all timestamps are UTC to avoid misinterpretation.
• IP addresses: if you show IPs, note the reverse DNS or ISP if that indicates corporate access (helps rebut “not my account” claims). Do not guess geolocation details—state only what your IP lookup service returned.
• 3DS and fraud signals: attach 3DS authentication receipts or gateway risk assessment fields if available — include the result code and authentication timestamp (if you have them).
• Data retention: design your logging policy to retain detailed logs for a timeframe aligned with your subscription terms and expected dispute windows. Deadlines vary by processor - check your notification or the official reason code guide.
• For mobile SDKs and embedded products, include device identifiers and app version numbers alongside the timestamps — these often tie a device to the account.
• Industry note for B2B SaaS: corporate IP ranges, SSO logs (SAML/OIDC assertions), and SCIM provisioning events are high-value evidence that the account belonged to the business that authorized the subscription.
• Refer to the /codes hub for canonical reason code descriptions and processor links when you need to map the issuer’s reason back to the evidence you’re collecting.

How ProofReturn Helps

ProofReturn automates the repetitive, error-prone parts of assembling usage logs into dispute-ready packages. It can:

• Automatically gather and normalize authentication, feature, and API logs into CSV/JSON exports formatted for issuers.
• Generate a human-readable narrative and manifest that maps each claim to exact log lines so reviewers don’t have to hunt through raw data.
• Sanitize sensitive fields while preserving the audit trail you need to prove usage.
• Queue and submit evidence through supported processor portals where available, and track follow-up requests.

Using automation reduces the time your team spends assembling evidence and lowers the risk of incomplete or poorly formatted submissions — which improves odds of a favorable outcome without promising a guaranteed result.

FAQ Section

Which usage logs matter most for a SaaS chargeback?

Authentication logs (login timestamps, IPs, user-agents), API request logs (endpoint, status, request ID), feature events (actions taken in the app), and any download or export records are the most persuasive. Pair them with the transaction receipt and a short timeline.

How should I format logs for the issuing bank?

Provide a concise PDF summary up front that tells the story in plain English, then attach raw logs as CSV or JSON. Include a manifest listing each file and reference specific lines in the narrative (e.g., "see auth-logs.csv line 271"). Use UTC timestamps and label each field in the CSV header clearly.

Can I use analytics dashboards as evidence?

Dashboards are useful for internal investigation but are often insufficient alone because they’re aggregate. Export the underlying event logs or provide screenshots of the specific raw events with timestamps and identifiers — banks prefer verifiable, time-stamped event records.

What about privacy — can I submit IP addresses and device IDs?

Only submit what’s necessary and permissible under your privacy policy and applicable law. Mask or hash personally identifiable elements when possible and document what was redacted. Make sure your submission notes any redactions and why they were done.

How do I show API usage if my customer used a shared API key?

Try to find correlating evidence: timestamps of API calls aligned with account logins, OAuth tokens issued to a specific user, or IP addresses that match login sessions. If a single API key was used by multiple users, show the authorization flow or any attributed user IDs tied to the activity.

My customer says they used the product months ago then filed a dispute — what evidence helps?

Provide a full subscription lifecycle: signup, renewals, any usage around the renewal, and any cancellation or support interactions. Usage over a prolonged window (logs across months) tied to the billed period counters "never used" claims. Include timestamps and any content generated or exported by the account.

Do I need to include raw server logs or is summarized data okay?

Include both: a short human summary and the raw logs. Summaries help reviewers quickly understand your case; raw logs provide the verifiable evidence. Make sure raw logs include request IDs or transaction IDs so the bank can match them to payment gateway records.

What should I do if my logs are incomplete or missing?

If logs are incomplete, show what you do have and explain why gaps exist (e.g., logging rotation, retention policy). Provide alternative supporting evidence such as support tickets, generated content, invoices, or account settings that indicate usage. Then update your logging policy to prevent recurrence.

Related Resources

• SaaS-specific chargeback solutions — technical and operational workflows for subscription businesses.
• Digital products chargeback defense — how to prove delivery and access for digital goods.
• What makes evidence compelling for chargeback responses — deeper principles on structuring proofs.
• Stripe Radar and chargeback response data — practical tips when using gateway-provided fraud signals and logs.
• Reason code and processor hub — map issuer reason codes to evidence requirements and processor links.
• Customer used product months then chargeback — tactics for disputes where usage predates the chargeback by months.

Final CTA

If you want a dispute package assembled for you, generate a structured evidence bundle now at /generate. The tool walks you through connecting logs, producing a clear narrative, and outputting attachments tailored for issuer review.