Yes, the dispute/chargeback process for cards is cumbersome today, but it is a solution - albeit inefficient. What is the crypto answer?
I don’t mean to put you on the spot for this question, but I would love to understand how decentralized solutions might address this issue.
Normally chargebacks are for scams or fraud not because something came broken from Amazon.
If you paid with cash, what is your remedy?
And if the reason you need a third-party is just to resolve disputes, then what's stopping to have other companies that do nothing but the scrow-holding and dispute resolution?
So for these cases you consider a high chance of the counterparty being dishonest, you use the alternative that can give you safeguards. If it makes more sense to use a credit card, you can still use it.
The lack of fraud (by which you really just mean lack of charge back) is only a benefit for the seller, and not the buyer. You are just moving risk to the buyer, and it is just like the old days of the Web when some sellers would try to get you to use western union to pay.
I've not seen you describe this yet in the thread, which tells me there is no benefit or you haven't thought this through.
In this vague hypothetical situation, what a lot of crypto folk would tell you is that you should use a smart contract, and not a regular transaction, to pay. Hypothetically the contract/network will act as an escrow agent, and would only complete the transaction when all input parameters are true AKA all parties are "satisfied". The successful input parameters and their truth sources would be agreed upon before hand.
I could argue more specific scenarios around fraud (buyer receives a good/service and pretends it was not satisfactory), but that can go on forever and I would encourage readers to go search for answers to specific edge cases because they are out there.
But the users of this platform do not need to know how to code.