Chip&Sig Refusal: HSBC

How did you ask? Suppose you write to them and say; " I am physically unable to use PIN numbers please send me a Chip and Signature card".

I' be interested to know what physical limitations someone had that prevented them from punching in a PIN but still enabling them to sign a chit. Effectively I imagine this means that old style cards won't be issued but they have to keep their options open to avoid falling foul of the Disability Discrimination Act. But then, perhaps if you are unable to read a card that's smaller than 12" x 6" they should have the facility to issue one of these. I'm sure the Human Rights Act has a place in this as well somewhere.

Rob Graham

I asked if they would supply me with a Chip and Signature card because I felt that Chip and Pin was a backward step from the cardholder's viewpoint.

I think "physically unable" really means unable to remember the PIN or the ordering of the digits in it.

Another bank (I think it was my own, Cahoot) said that I would have to have a "registered" disability, ie they wouldn't take my word for it. The really don't want to give out these cards.

I wheedled one out of natwest on the grounds C&P was insecure.

My visa issuer was stroppier ("you don't have a choice" -- don't I now?). I wrote a highly legalistic letter, overriding all of their T&Cs, about C&P cards issued to me - basically saying mere use of the PIN in a fraudulent way wouldn't be taken as proof I'd divulged it. But I hope I never have to test that in court....... :-)

Of course they don't want to give out the C&Sig cards - they're on a financial winner if they can avoid this.

BTW, I read somewhere (guardian online, IIRC) that card fraud had gone up recently as a result of mass postings of C&P cards of which a fraction had been stolen in the post. Seems to me that this is an admission that the cards aren't secure - a stolen card minus its PIN

Not at the moment when there are so many places that dont need a pin to use them.

"Mike Scott" wrote

It wouldn't anyway!

"Mike Scott" wrote

Presumably, both card & PINs were stolen from the post?

Anyway - under the old system, it was MUCH *less* secure - because the thief would only need to steal the card, and not the PIN as well. The thief then simply signs the back of the card with the name (kindly printed on front of card!), but in his own handwriting!!

and i think the article highlighted the biggest type of fraud is card no present (internet/phone) fraud, where the PIN isnt needed anyway.

surley in a couple of months/years time when u go to a shop and a mugger is looking out for potential victims and sees you with your non chip card he will think it easier to steal your card rather than anyone else with a chip...

In message , Mike Scott writes

The fraud is a result of their use as signature cards of course.

In message , Tim writes

OT I know but still somewhat relevant :-

At the weekend I was behind a lady a none Pin & Chip terminal. I wasnt taking much notice but she went off in a temper without her goods. The cashier was rolling about laughing. He said that she had asked if she could pay by Chip & Pin, not by signature. He had said no, cos the didnt have the equipment. She said, that was no good, because she wanted to pay with her husband's card as he had told her the pin.

Intelligent Finance just sent me a new card which is swipe and signature. No chip of any kind on it.

But any sensible bank gets the user to phone in to activate the card, surely? No activation - card useless (mostly). But I take the point about pins and sigs during the transition period.

Well, no, not entirely. There are plenty of establishments which will accept a card without obtaining authorisation either on-line or orally (by phone), so would not be able to tell an activated card from a nascent one.

Not HSBC, Citibank or Co-op Visa, to name but three.

TLA

"The Loan Arranger" wrote

At least one of those required activiation earlier this month when I received a card.

Can't speak for the other two...

In message , Mike Scott writes

Some do some dont.

As you say 'mostly' but perhaps 'often'.

NatWest are now following up sending a card with a letter asking you to notify them if you haven't received the card. An improvement, although of course this letter could be intercepted as well.

A card minus PIN is just fine for "cardholder not present" transactions. If they have your card, they also have your three-digit security code. Not that all online traders ask for this - certainly Amazon didn't last time I bought from them.

Brian