Credit Cards/Chip and Pin/ATM withdrawls

Bitstring , from the wonderful person Tim said

All except you, apparently.

Anyone that good would be in another line of work I suspect. OK, so maybe there's a 1% chance the forger can fool everyone's handwriting expert. There is a 0% chance of proving that 5432 was not 5432, regardless of how it was acquired/guessed/entered. Yeah, biometrics would be better, but a signature is still 1000 times as secure as a 4 digit number.

Firstly there are very few CCTVs attached to ATMs out there. Go look. Secondly, so what - the bank just claims you gave the PIN to someone. (Let them claim you gave your right hand & signing ability to someone .. be a tough trick, wouldn't it.)

No they don't they just need to prove/assert the customer was negligent. =Who= withdrew the money is not an issue. If it was withdrawn with the pin, it's your fault, at least that's the default starting condition.

Look, if you think a 4 digit number with 3 attempts at entry is sufficient security for £20k of funds, you are dumber than the banks (try using a 4 digit number for an online banking password and see what the automated strength checkers say)

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

Let's start with:

Sometimes it will be difficult and the "expert" will find inconclusive...

and:

I dispute that it's "close to zero". You may well be able to prove that you weren't at that location, or you might be able to obtain CCTV footage showing the fraudster making the transaction, etc etc.

Then let's move on to:

The Banking Code does not distinguish between C+S or C+P when discussing liability.

Nor does the Consumer Credit Act.

At 14:44:43 on 18/12/2005, GSV Three Minds in a Can delighted uk.finance by announcing:

Consistently? In one reply?

At 12:35:21 on 18/12/2005, Tim delighted uk.finance by announcing:

Speculation and conjecture seem more important than actual facts to this indivudual.

"Tumbleweed" wrote

They might *hope* that you just give in!

But they *do* have to prove it was you, if you refuse to pay when they ask you to cough up - don't they?

"Jim Ley" wrote

Exactly. The banks can't win, as they have an invalid argument!

"Jim Ley" wrote

Eh? Forget the court (to start with at least) - go to the Ombudsman first. A single-page letter, envelope & a second-class stamp surely isn't too expensive?

No, or at least, not until it gets to court, if they want to take it that far. Many will give up before then.

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

You don't have to prove that! - Irrelevant.

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

Equally, they could claim that you "gave" your Chip&Sig card to an accomplice!

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

No need - your signature is already on the back of the card for the thief / fraudster / accomplice to copy.

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

The same is true with Chip&Sig. You could have handed over your card to an accomplice, who used the card to purchase goods, and then denied it was you...

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

You could just as easily say (for a Chip&Sig card): "If goods were purchased with the card, it's your fault, at least that's the default starting condition."

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

Actually, I don't think that it's very high security and have never said that I thought it was.

This is one of the reasons why I'm saying that the banks can't show that you *have* been negligent, because there are so many other ways the PIN could have been obtained (rather than just from you being negligent).

"Tumbleweed" wrote

Exactly! They can't get the money off you without proving their case in court!

"Tumbleweed" wrote

If the bank gives up before then, all well and good!

"Palindr?me" wrote

Surely this is an even bigger risk with Chip&Sig cards?

All they need to do is come up behind you, knock you out & steal your C+S cards from your purse. Have a quick look at your sig on the reverse, and go spending.

With a Chip&PIN card, they need to do the extra step of either guessing the correct PIN, or getting you to divulge it (difficult when you are unconscious)...

Bitstring , from the wonderful person Tim said

There is not 1 in 100 IMO who could copy it well enough to convince a panel of handwriting experts.

You still haven't grasped that I don't give a rats @$$ about 'purchasing goods', I only care about the risk of cash withdrawal from an ATM, using a Credit card.

Very droll. is this the 5 minute argument? In which case your time is up.

Palindr?me wrote

Exactly! At last you've got it! Or do you consider it best to select a new car by its vulnerability to break-ins? When did you last see a till operator check a signature properly?

That is nonsense of course, with a copy of your sig on the back. I can't believe that this thread has lasted so long; I requested a C&P card as soon as they were available, rather than wait until my name came up alphabetically.

At 17:13:00 on 18/12/2005, GSV Three Minds in a Can delighted uk.finance by announcing:

I'm not sure *I* could copy my signature well enough to do the same. It's certainly different every time I sign.

In which case, the potential liability's even less since you'll have reported the card stolen to the police and card issuer as soon as the muggers left you alone, leaving them with a maximum withdrawal amount of a few hundred pounds.

Bitstring , from the wonderful person Gordon said

The problem is that a PIN is a key that anyone can operate. A signature can only be properly operated by you - yes, someone can 'force the door open' with a forgery, but they leave an audit trail (a piece of paper with a rather dodgy signature on).

Never, but then when did you see a signature on the back of a credit card which matches the one you normally put on the paper slip? Not mine

- the plastic on the CC is too narrow. However my 'paper slip' signature is reproducible with pretty good accuracy.

My real objection is that the =same= key which operates your 'car' (i.e. purchase of goods in shops) also opens your front door (cash withdrawal at any ATM). You can't do that with a forged signature, however good a forger you may be.

"Tumbleweed" wrote

Wrong, because the PIN has to be used with the correct card.

Anyway thought we were discussing which is safer and more secure, chip and PIN or chip and SIG.

Derek

"Palindr?me" wrote

But if you have chip and PIN and used card correctly, the thief wouldn't know your PIN so could make no use of card.

If you stay with your chip and SIG the thief could possibly use it in very busy shops if he/she makes your signature look like yours. Derek

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote

But it's correct to say that my card can not be used in shops, restaurants, hotels etc if the PIN isn't entered correctly.

And there is no way anyone can possibly know my correct PIn apart form myself!

Derek

So your "except" was meaningless.

Where did I wrote that?

Yes, I didn't mention anything further, but I certainly never said that was all that could happen.

I just said that it is very rare the banks will even let it get that far before backing down.

It happens, as you pointed out. But very rarely, is all I was saying.