"James" wrote
You don't need to use an ATM to withdraw cash - you can get it "over the counter". They'll just ask for your signature. Are you going to ask your credit card company to remove the need to have a copy of your signature on file, as well?!
If your the victim of fraud and your credit card is used before you report it lost then if the fraudster uses your PIN it's more than likely that you will be held responsibble for this fraud. You will be considered negligent. What is considered to be PIN negligence in the UK has still to be be defined.
You can always say sorry that isn't my signature and there is no forensice evidence (prints) on the banks copy of the withdrawal slip than proves it was me who signed this slip. Try saying you dind't use, or was negligent with your PIN. This is exactly where there is a shfit of liability for fraud.
It should be your choice, PIN or signature. BIN the PIN!
Good point; I get this sent to me and bin it right away. Especially as I can't change it to something easier to remember...
Same problem as on-line banking versus bank statements. I have already asked my bank 5 times not to post me any statements; it seems hopeless. I will try again this afternoon.
Roy
"James" wrote
Where is your evidence for that statement?
"James" wrote
There are (less than) 10,000 possibilities for a PIN number (4 digits - less than 10,000 by removing combinations such as 0000). If 100,000 cards are stolen, and the thief simply *guesses* the PIN - then possibly more than 10 of those 100,000 stolen will have the PIN guessed correctly. Give the thief 3 chances at the correct PIN (before the card is locked-out) and that makes around 30 in 100,000 will be guessed correctly.
YOU CANNOT BE CONSIDERED NEGLIGENT JUST BECAUSE THE THIEF GUESSED YOUR PIN !!!!
If you think you can get away with insisting that a signature was not your own, then why do you think you could not "get away with" insisting that you had not divulged your PIN to anyone? Because only 3 in 10,000 stolen cards would have a PIN guessed correctly? But that is just the point - 3 WILL be guessed correctly, and it will *not* have been negligence on their part - hence the credit card company would have a difficult job to *prove* that the victim had truly been negligent ...
I have the opposite situation because my bank won't issue a cash card that isn't also a Switch card. I don't ever want to use a Switch card in a shop so when I get a new card I immediately write ==VOID== in big black letters across the signature strip.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if a thief replicated the ==VOID== onto a sales voucher. :-)
Does the average cashier know what void means? And since your signature can look like pretty much anything, all you are really doing is saying that you happen to sign "barnes" in a way that looks like "void" ...
Is someone who is negligent completely innocent? If you lost a bundle of cash, who's fault is that? If you loose the key to your house and someone breaks in is that the fault of the person who cut your key? Shouldn't you be just as careful with your card as you are with cash?
Pins can be enabled for cards now without them having ATM access. The two things are being classed as seperate. Just like you used to be able to have a switch/Delta card without a PIN if you wished.
You should also note that if "hooded crooks" withdraw your cash from a credit card you are covered by the Consumer Credit Act for the entire sum. Most banks have their own policies on Debit cards, but the customer's liability is usually limited.
This is known as "fraud" - The bank will ask you to sign an authority to pass details to the police and they will do this. You could expect a.n.other to be looked for just like anyone else who stole £500.00
Debit cards are NOT mandatory. Credit cards are NOT mandatory. They are your personal choice. As previously stated you are not obliged to be able to withdraw money from an ATM.
It seems to me that many of your objections are to the fact that using a PIN to pay for goods and services is something new. Signatures can be forged and last year more money was stolen this way than the value of all the propery stolen through burglary/robbery. Banks just want to reduce this loss and I struggle to see how using a PIN is that different to the current system.
[SNIPPED]Dom
This is the great British head-in-sand/"proove everything is safe 100% before I touch it" stuff that legends are made of.
Look, if you don't want a PIN, just destroy anything your bank sends you to do with PINs.
Better still, cut up your credit-card and only shop with case. Don't speak to strangers, and assume everybody is out to get you.
Squawk!
It would be even more interesting if you had proof that this was your signature and, along with other ID (passport?), tried to use the card.
There was a guy in the US who gradually tried a whole range of pictures and other rubbish as his signature and had no trouble to speak of.
Squawk!
Without a hint of irony, tasty chicken astounded uk.finance on 18 Feb 2004 by announcing:
Deviating slightly, there a guy flew to Italy & back last Thursday using his wife's passport.
Without a hint of irony, dom astounded uk.finance on
17 Feb 2004 by announcing:
It's something else to complain about.
Thanks for that - very amusing!
Squawk!
What is PIN negligence - define it? Crooks shoulder surf, use false key pads at ATMS, micro-cameras, phish on the Internet, make bogus calls just to acquire someones PIN. In theory EMV compliant Chip cards will still be able to be cloned so long as they have a magstrip. What's to stop your card being cloned in the UK and used in Europe/Americl or Asia, several days later? A smart system may pick up an unusual spending pattern but armed with a cloned card and PIN with a credit card most crooks will be heading straight to the first ATM they can find. Up until recently a PIN with a credit card was consumer choice. Now your getting them if you want them or not. One things for sure the crooks will!
Fraud at ATM's rose 37% last year - PINs are used exclusively at ATMS. Chip & PIN will do little or nothing to preven CNP fraud, lost in mail fraud or Identity Theft. C&P is designed to deter fraud in shops. £200 million was lost to card fraud in shops last year. The higher % of this was due to counterfeit cards. CHIPS should deter this, but only if ALL shops have equipment capable of reading Chip Cards. It can then be assumed that the rest of this fraud takes place on lost or stolen cards. One area that the banking industry could improve on is communications. Reporting your card lost and a block being put on often never reaches retail point of sale for quite some time. A signature does achieve two things - an auditable trail between the person carrying out a purchase and crime. The second is that neither your signature or your print will be on the shops copy of the transaction slip - you can prove you didn't carryout that particular transaction if you have to. Try denying use of a PIN!
On the same theme the cost of Chip and PIN in the UK is estimated to be £1.1 billion and rising. Retailers are expected to pick up at least one third of this cost. This is at a time when Banks are announcing record profits. Who is being robbed?
James
Without a hint of irony, snipped-for-privacy@tiscali.co.uk (James) astounded uk.finance on 19 Feb 2004 by announcing:
And then find out that the cardholder does not have a cash withdrawal facility on the card.
Cash withdrawal is still a consumer choice.
They have been, yes. With EMV, PINs are also now used for transactions.
Requiring cards to be activated on receipt should help with postal fraud.
And those that don't will themselves become liable for the fraud.
I can go to a store today and sign the slip incorrectly, and wearing gloves. I can then 'prove' I didn't carry out that transaction, even though I did.
If you're really that worried about credit card fraud and misuse of PINs, don't apply for a credit card. It really is that simple.
See:
Yes, but then mail suffers. I think the government might have an interest in continuing that service.
I care about the guard in my building delivering me these unnecessary statements more than I care about the interest rates.
Roy
[SNIP]
None of the methods of obtaining PINs you have given can be considered negligent. A victim of any of the above frauds is just a victim in the same way as someone who is pickpocketed or defrauded by a criminal.
Nothing, that's not something which will change until other countries implement Chip and PIN. That's not what the scheme is being implemented for.
I think this has been mentioned to you before several times. You do NOT have to be able to access an ATM with your credit card (see below). It is your choice. A signature strip on the back, however, gives you the option to make encashments at banks displaying the VISA/Mastercard logo.
Did anyone say that they would? Noboday has said that this is the reason for implementing the Chip and PIN system. Banks put there own procedures in place to reduce this type of fraud and absorb the losses where they do not work.
The bank will accept liability for use of your card from the moment you report it lost though
How can you *prove* that you didn't carry out a transaction if a copy of your signature is on the transaction slip? D&C cards have signatures on the back so it's quite simple to practice and subsequently forge a signature.
Retailers will benefit from decreased losses to fraud in the same way as banks will.
I think we are all keen to listen to your views, so perhaps you can answer a few questions.
1) Have you ever been the victim of card fraud - either ATM or forgery, and have you suffered a loss as a result? 2) Are you concerned that people who work in shops where you have paid for goods and services may currently have access to your card details and an example signature? 3) Will you be willing to give Chip and PIN a try, or do you intend on cancelling your current D&C cards to reduce your exposure to fraud? 4) Do you work in either retail or finance?5) Given the information that so many kind people have provided you with in this Newsgroup do you have any ideas for an alternative?
dom
I would hate to test this with a credit card, when it's their money they are trying to recover. Insurance companies have been know to look for the slightest of excuses to wriggle out of genuine claims. I can see the same happening with PINS.
If you have a look at the break down of where fraud is committed it is not a level playing field. Some retailers who seldom hit for fraud and others are slaughtered. Some may feel as if they are subsidising others.
Wouldn't you agree that this should be totally funded by the banking industry?
The answer to 1, is I don't know. I lost a card in Wolverhampton two years ago. The police told me two different things. The first that it was found in the possession of an illegal immigrant, the second a different policeman this time that it was a drug addict who had it. It was an Egg Card and as soon as I reported it lost I had no access to online account details. However my daughter, a midwife had a Marks & Spencer store card. She moved overseas for a few years , settled her account and informed M&S. M&S in their wisdom and without her knowlege sent her a replacement card. This card went astray in the post. On her return to UK she had a statement sent to her address in Harrogate telling her she had bought £300 on goods in M&S in Hedge End (Southampton). She's never been to Hedge End. She had to account for her whereabouts (in the slips at a birth) and wasn't held responsible. M&S never informed the police as she expected them to do. We found this out by accident. Apparently it is up to the cardholder to inform the police when fraud takes place. Points I am making apart from unreported crime is I wouldn't have known and I doubt if Egg would have reported fraudulent transactions that had taken place on my card. Have I lost any money because of it, yes.
I was more concerned over personal data being held in overseas call centres. But action I've taken makes me feel quite safe now. I've described this below. if you require further information please email me. snipped-for-privacy@ticali.co.uk
In shops no, although cases of collusion between fraudsters and shops staff were highlighted in a TV documentary last year.
I always leave my Thumbprint on the rear side of shops copies of transaction slips. I also wrote to the three credit reference agencies and had them put a notice of correction, which is seen by anyone who views my file that whenever I carryout any financial transaction or apply for any financial product that I will authenticate my signature with my print. Failure by me to do so should result in products or services being withheld. This way I take ownership of my own identity. If any crook wishes to apply for cards or loans using my details then at the very least I can prove it wasn't me. This works as a deterrent. Simple and very, very effective.
I certainly support Chips, they will deter counterfeit. But only if all retailers are EMV compliant not only in this country but world-wide. PINS I have little faith in. I will have a block put on the PIN with my debit card and draw cash over the counter on the strength of my signature, print and if necessary provide secondary ID.
My current debit card is a multi-function card therefore I will still be able to use it to guarantee cheques.
No way will I have a PIN with my credit card. I'd have to have to the same PIN with both cards (I use the credit card infrequently in shops) and I wouldnt like to think that if some crook got hold of it they could get up to £500 on a daily basis until I noticed my loss or the card was withheld. I truly believe that their is a shift of liability for fraud from the banks and retailers directly on to the cardholder.
I have been closely associated with both over the last few years. Do you work for the card industry?
Yes and if Chip & PIN suits your needs go for it, but beware.
Cardholders should be given a choice:
a. A Chip and PIN if you wish one. But Terms & Conditions should be clarified.
b. A Chip, Photo (optional) and Signature. If you dont wish to use your cards for cash withdrawals or you are unable to manage a PIN for whatever reason.
c. A Chip, Photo (optional), Signature and Thumbprint. Cardholder driven. This protects cardholders against types of fraud that PINS can't. You can't forget your print and in face to face transactions it cannot be forged.
Taking prints with credit and debit cards has been used in the Inverness Region for quite sometime now. The Northern Constabulary as a whole reported a reduction in card fraud of 82%. Merthyr Tydfil, reported an 87% reduction in card fraud Christmas before last. Why not adapt this system as I have to protect yourself.
Look at it like this: If you have your card or card and PIN pinched and you are a victim of fraud which of these three choices above would be most beneficial to you the cardholder?
a. Where you may have difficulty proving it wasn't you who carried out the transaction and you could be considered as having been negligent with your PIN.
b. Where at least you can ask if the store has CCTV because your photo is on the card and you can prove you were not in the shop at that time, or does your signature match, or are your prints on the shops copy of the transaction slip, they shouldn't be.
c. Or you could say sorry that print is not mine, and prove it. However you do have some forensic that will help identify the offender their print!
The choice should be yours.
To attack most types of financial crime an auditable trail is a necessity
Hope this answers your questions. James
Without a hint of irony, snipped-for-privacy@tiscali.co.uk (James) astounded uk.finance on 20 Feb 2004 by announcing:
Then you believe incorrectly. The liability shift is from the bank to the retailer, if they do not have an EMV-compliant POS.
They will be. If you don't want an EMV card, you don't apply for one. Simple, eh?
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.