How Disputes Work When a Buyer and Seller Disagree

Most sales close without anyone needing to read this page. But when a buyer and seller genuinely disagree about whether an asset was delivered as described, it helps to know how disputes work before you're in one — not while you're anxious mid-transaction.

When a Deal Doesn't Go as Planned

Every sale on the marketplace runs through escrow: the buyer pays, the money is held, the seller transfers the asset, and the buyer gets an inspection window to confirm everything matches the listing before funds release. Most disagreements get resolved in that window through ordinary back-and-forth — a missing access detail, a metric that needs clarifying, a transfer step that didn't go through cleanly the first time. A dispute is what happens when that back-and-forth doesn't resolve things and one side formally disagrees with the other about what was promised or delivered.

Opening a Dispute

Either the buyer or the seller can open a dispute during the inspection window if they believe the other side isn't holding up their end — the asset doesn't match what was listed, access wasn't properly transferred, or payment terms aren't being honored. Opening a dispute pauses the automatic release of funds. From that point, the case moves to human review instead of resolving automatically.

The Chat Is Evidence

This is the part worth understanding before you ever need it: everything discussed in the contract's chat — what was promised, what was disclosed, what was agreed on before and after the sale — is what the review is based on. That's exactly why the platform keeps every step of a contract inside its own chat rather than letting buyers and sellers move the conversation to email or DMs. If a claim was made and it's not in the chat, it's very hard to weigh. If it's in the chat, it's part of the record.

Practically, this means the best protection during a live deal isn't a verbal promise — it's writing the important details into the contract's own chat as you go: exact terms, confirmations, anything a seller discloses about the asset, anything a buyer flags as an issue.

What Human Review Actually Looks At

A person reviews the case — not an automated rule — and works from the contract's chat history, the original listing (what was declared about metrics, strikes, monetization, and transfer method), and whatever documentation either side has added to the case. There's no fixed script for every dispute because every asset and every disagreement is different, but the standard is the same throughout: what does the record actually show, not who argues more persistently.

How Disputes Work: The Possible Outcomes

Once a case is reviewed, it resolves one of a few ways:

In the buyer's favor — if the asset clearly didn't match what was disclosed, funds can be returned to the buyer.
In the seller's favor — if the asset matched the listing and the buyer's claim doesn't hold up, funds release to the seller as normal.
By agreement — the two sides settle the disagreement themselves during the process, and the case closes on those terms.
A split — when the record shows both sides have a partial claim (for example, the asset was delivered but with a disclosed detail that didn't fully match), funds can be divided rather than awarded entirely to one side.

None of these outcomes are guaranteed in advance, and the review doesn't default to either side. It follows what the chat and the listing actually show.

Reducing the Chance You'll Need One

The single best move on both sides is disclosure: sellers should state metrics, strikes, monetization status, and transfer method precisely in the listing, and buyers should ask clarifying questions in the contract chat before paying, not after. Browse how listings are structured at /en/ativos, or read the full mechanics of custody at /en/blog/what-is-escrow-digital-assets. If you're ready to list an asset with clear terms from the start, start at /en/vender.