American Express loses fight over dodgy $45k Vietnam bar bill

An Australian businessman has successfully challenged a $45,000 American Express drinks bill in Vietnam after it was ruled two bars took his credit card and ripped him off. See what they charged him for.

An Australian businessman has successfully challenged a $45,000 American Express drinks bill in Vietnam – including 1400 tequila shots – after it was ruled two bars took his credit card and ripped him off by $42,000.

The man argued the true amount he and a client spent over three nights at the Ho Chi Minh City bars - Bottoms Up and Double Shots - was $3300.

According to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), the bars targeted the businessman as a ‘mark’ for fraud.

He became aware of the seven-figure charge shortly after he returned from Vietnam in September last year when his Amex was declined.

The man, who AFCA identified as “Mr S”, checked his account and saw four charges of between $6500 and $16,400 from Bottoms Up and Double Shots.

The man was charged between $6500 and $16,400 at Bottoms Up (pictured) and Double Shots. Source: Facebook

Mr S told AFCA he had handed his card to bar staff after being given hand-written bills for much smaller amounts equal to between $600 and $1100.

He said his card was taken away to process the charges. When he asked to enter his PIN, he was told it was not needed. He also said he was never told to provide his signature. When bar staff returned without receipts, Mr S said they told him the EFTPOS machine was faulty.

After Mr S disputed spending so much, Amex raised chargeback requests with Bottoms up and Double Shots. The bars responded with what Amex told Mr S were signed and itemised records that it claimed validated the $45,000 of expenses.

In a letter to Mr S, Amex said: “On the basis of the information provided and the results of our investigation, the final conclusion reached is that we believe (the transactions) to be valid and correctly executed. Therefore, the amount previously under review has been reapplied to your account balance and you will see this on your forthcoming statement.”

The disputed bills amounted to an insane amount of alcohol.

However, AFCA found the signatures were “illegible scrawl”. None was the same as any other or “bore any resemblance to Mr S’s genuine signature.”

The adjudicator continued: “I have examined the four ‘invoices’. Each is a Word document with an inset spreadsheet component.

“Anyone with a computer and basic computing skills could create the ‘invoices’ in a matter of moments. All four could have been (and I posit, were) created prior to the event, then a matching record of charge printed out for the exact total on each ‘invoice’ after bar staff had identified an unsuspecting card-holding ‘mark’.

“A foreign tourist or businessman such as Mr S was the ideal target.

Inside Ho Chi Minh City bar Double Shots. Source: Facebook

“Both Ho Chi Minh City bars may have received chargeback requests in the past, so could have known precisely what evidence to provide to shore up their assertions that Mr S had authorised the disputed charges,” the adjudicator said.

Under the ePayments Code, American Express was liable for the disputed charges, leaving the man to pay only the $3300 he admitted spending.

“The outcome is fair as the information shows it is more likely than not that the disputed charges were created fraudulently at the merchant’s premises and were mostly unauthorised,” the adjudicator said.

An Amex spokeswoman said “we aren’t at liberty to comment on this case”.

The two bars did not respond to requests for comment.