"Dave N" wrote
The criminal does not care who the victim is -- whether it's the merchant or the bank (or even the true cardholder).
"Dave N" wrote
In the case of a crime causing a loss, of course it is!
"Dave N" wrote
The insurance industry *benefits* from higher levels of crime. People then insure more, and the insurance companies hence make more profit. What point are you trying to make here? Who do you think the "victim" is?
I stated that no criminal act of fraud has been perpetrated upon the bank. If you do not accept my statement, please demonstrate what deception has been practised on the bank and by whom. I trust that you do accept that if there is no deception, there can be no fraud.
Why is this so difficult for you to understand?
(cross-posting removed - you are only trying to start a flame war)
"Dave N" wrote
If the liability for the fraud falls on the bank rather than the merchant (eg the fraudster had stolen the actual card, and used it with the PIN - which had been shouldersurfed - at an EMV POS), then the fraudster has deceived the bank out of the value of the payment made to the merchant. Can't you see that?
You cross-posted yet again without any form of courtesy warning. Do you suffer from Asperger's Syndrome?
So what ? There is nothing wrong with cross-posting per se.
Superfluous.
Reportable abuse.
"Dave N" wrote
Both groups appear relevant to the subject matter of the post. Anyway, this is usenet - accept it!
I'll take it from your inability to reply to my point that you've now accepted you were wrong.
My question was not abusive. I suggest that you research Asperger's Syndrome before embarrassing yourself further.
e.g.
"Researchers and people with AS have contributed to a shift in attitudes away from the notion that AS is a deviation from the norm that must be treated or cured, and towards the view that AS is a difference rather than a disability.[6]"
"[6] ^ a b Baron-Cohen S (2000). "Is Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism necessarily a disability?". Dev Psychopathol 12 (3): 489?5
Doing so without explanation or warning is deceitful, especially so when your lack of transparency had already been pointed out to you once before. One is left to speculate as to your motive.
Not at all.
"Dave N" wrote
Hardly - if you want to know what NGs the post has been sent to, then just look up there ^^^^.
If I wanted to be deceitful, I would have sent the post to the two groups separately, then you'd need to look inside both groups to see where it had gone.
"Dave N" wrote
As just explained, everything was perfectly transparent.
"Dave N" wrote
The motive is merely to reach a larger, but still relevant, audience. What other motive could there be?
"Dave N" wrote
Then counter my argument, if you feel you can!
No. If you did possess a characteristic such as Asperger's Syndrome, I would have "gone the extra mile" in order to accommodate you, but that is apparently not the case.
(cross-posting removed)
"Dave N" wrote
Hmmm. Have you diagnosed me remotely, on the basis of only a few usenet posts? Do you have any other special powers?
ARe you near fareham? Saw a story about a ?BP? garage near there that had had cctv installed to catch PINS.
I think he started wittering on about aspergers and 'cross posting'* in order to try and divert you from the fact he bizzarely argues that a bank hasnt been defrauded when someone obtains money from it via false pretences!
*(two , and both highly relevant, groups, is hardly a crime against humanity, besides which, whats the issue with relevant cross posting which it was?)
Redhill, Surrey.
Although this is an old post, I think its worth mentioning that this type of fraud is still going on, and has extended beyond Britain.
I found three charges on my debit card for a company called CARLIOL SQUAR no E. It started with one small transaction then two larger sums. I called my bank and the matter is currently being disputed. Hopefully I will get my money back and a new card as soon as possible. Also, I have never been to Britain before, so I have no idea how this could have happened...
Atanyrate, to say there was no crime and no victim, is completely out of reason. Money was stolen on my account, my assets frozen. No crime there? Would be more valid if they had stolen my purse instead?
url:
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.