[nothatscool]

But he would have had the opportunity to manage the payment himself whether that be not accepting credits cards, using a payment processor with charge back insurance or at the very least trying to verify that the credit card actually belongs to the client. As far as I know he can't do any of these things because the client isn't paying him, they are paying upwork and upwork is paying him.

[wpietri]

Sure. And he always had that opportunity. Both in general and specifically with this client when they started meeting in person. He chose to bill through Upwork and then specifically declined to use the time-tracking software under which they would cover fraud.

I get that this was a surprising outcome for him, and I feel bad for him. But as a business consultant working specifically in fintech, I don't feel very bad for him. Looking at the dates, I also suspect he isn't telling us about the fraudulent payments he did get to pocket.

[CRConrad]

> He chose to bill through Upwork and then specifically declined to use the time-tracking software under which they would cover fraud.

That software is for detecting a different kind -- exactly the opposite kind to what happened here -- of fraud.

[Edit to add:]

> Looking at the dates, I also suspect he isn't telling us about the fraudulent payments he did get to pocket.

I thought he mentioned that he had worked for "Robin" for two years? And he never says he was paid with a different credit card for the first eighteen months, does he? So as I read it he does indeed tell us about the fraudulent payments he did get to pocket: Those for those first eighteen months. It's just that the legitimate credit card holder couldn't issue a chargeback for those, so there's nothing for Upwork to try and claw back from him there.