Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Irritated34
    • By Irritated34 5th Feb 18, 8:23 AM
    • 6Posts
    • 3Thanks
    Irritated34
    Credit cards banning BitCoin
    • #1
    • 5th Feb 18, 8:23 AM
    Credit cards banning BitCoin 5th Feb 18 at 8:23 AM
    I see today on the news that credit card company's are refusing to give customers credit for bitcoin. This is great news, however it's a shame that MBNA didn't refuse me credit for Binary Options, I was scammed out of 18,000 and I now have to pay off this debt! Who's the winner here? Option.FM certainly, and of course MBNA, me? No, I'm now a nervous wreck, and in debt up to my neck!
Page 1
    • chattychappy
    • By chattychappy 5th Feb 18, 8:37 AM
    • 6,621 Posts
    • 3,560 Thanks
    chattychappy
    • #2
    • 5th Feb 18, 8:37 AM
    • #2
    • 5th Feb 18, 8:37 AM
    It is a tricky issue - the extent to which CCs, banks and others can get involved in protecting people from bad decisions. Where do you draw the line?

    1) Stopping a transaction to a known fraudster?
    2) Stopping a class of transactions where people have had problems - eg binary options
    3) Stopping investments in volatile "instruments" - eg bitcoin
    4) Limiting transactions on gambling sites because it can't be good for people
    5) Stopping transactions in strip clubs, brothels (where legal), escorts etc
    6) Limiting the use of CCs to buy fatty foods, cigarettes

    Personally I'd probably I wouldn't go much further than (1). But I'd have systems in place so that people who have problems with, say, gambling can voluntary block those transactions.

    The problem is that if banks start taking responsibility for this stuff, it adds to costs and then you get people claiming (perhaps as you feel) why didn't they stop the transaction that lost me money?

    I'd be rather annoyed if my bank told me I couldn't use my debit card to buy, say, bitcoins. My answer would be: it's my money! But for a CC, I'd feel they are more entitled.
    • camelot1971
    • By camelot1971 5th Feb 18, 9:21 AM
    • 639 Posts
    • 1,001 Thanks
    camelot1971
    • #3
    • 5th Feb 18, 9:21 AM
    • #3
    • 5th Feb 18, 9:21 AM
    I see today on the news that credit card company's are refusing to give customers credit for bitcoin. This is great news, however it's a shame that MBNA didn't refuse me credit for Binary Options, I was scammed out of 18,000 and I now have to pay off this debt! Who's the winner here? Option.FM certainly, and of course MBNA, me? No, I'm now a nervous wreck, and in debt up to my neck!
    Originally posted by Irritated34
    Sorry but it's your own fault. Nobody made you gamble and no doubt if MBNA had blocked the transaction you would have been on here bleating about how "bad" the banks are for not letting you spend your money how you wanted.
    • chattychappy
    • By chattychappy 5th Feb 18, 9:30 AM
    • 6,621 Posts
    • 3,560 Thanks
    chattychappy
    • #4
    • 5th Feb 18, 9:30 AM
    • #4
    • 5th Feb 18, 9:30 AM
    Sorry but it's your own fault. Nobody made you gamble and no doubt if MBNA had blocked the transaction you would have been on here bleating about how "bad" the banks are for not letting you spend your money how you wanted.
    Originally posted by camelot1971
    That's harsh given the tenor of the OP's post. Also, we don't know the extent to which he was "scammed" or simply gambled and lost.

    But given what you say, where do you stand on Lloyds blocking Bitcoin transactions on their CC?

    Would you repeal S75? What about chargeback? Surely people buying those Uggs (or whatever they are) from China for $10 knew the risk they were taking?
    • Deadbeat
    • By Deadbeat 5th Feb 18, 9:47 AM
    • 131 Posts
    • 144 Thanks
    Deadbeat
    • #5
    • 5th Feb 18, 9:47 AM
    • #5
    • 5th Feb 18, 9:47 AM
    I can see their point of view. With the uncertainty surrounding cryptocurrencies they are probably seeing similar risks to them as with gambling.
    • jack_pott
    • By jack_pott 5th Feb 18, 10:23 AM
    • 4,402 Posts
    • 5,696 Thanks
    jack_pott
    • #6
    • 5th Feb 18, 10:23 AM
    • #6
    • 5th Feb 18, 10:23 AM
    It is a tricky issue - the extent to which CCs, banks and others can get involved in protecting people from bad decisions. Where do you draw the line?
    Originally posted by chattychappy
    Radio 4 was arguing that the banks are protecting themselves from people's bad decisions.
    I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
    Friedrich Nietzsche
    • nic_c
    • By nic_c 5th Feb 18, 10:49 AM
    • 1,235 Posts
    • 688 Thanks
    nic_c
    • #7
    • 5th Feb 18, 10:49 AM
    • #7
    • 5th Feb 18, 10:49 AM
    So is it a case that some bank official thinks any loss could be covered by S75? They are only talking about credit card not debit card payments, so it has nothing to do with morality but the specific risk to CREDIT rather than DEBIT card payments
    • Westminster
    • By Westminster 5th Feb 18, 11:48 AM
    • 831 Posts
    • 511 Thanks
    Westminster
    • #8
    • 5th Feb 18, 11:48 AM
    • #8
    • 5th Feb 18, 11:48 AM
    No the banks are protecting themselves from daft people gambling with the banks money and the highly likely outcome of daft people then defaulting on the debt.

    With debit cards the money comes straight out of your bank account so only the ultra-high interest overdraft is at risk and this is already priced in to the insane fees / rates on overdrafts.

    Makes sense to me
    Hi. Martin has asked me to tell you I'm a Board Guide on the following boards: Mortgages & Endowments, Mortgage-Free Wannabe, House Buying, Renting & Selling, Small Biz & Charities' MoneySaving and Charities.

    I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge posts on there. Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com (it's not part of my role to deal with this). Any views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.
    • chattychappy
    • By chattychappy 6th Feb 18, 8:28 AM
    • 6,621 Posts
    • 3,560 Thanks
    chattychappy
    • #9
    • 6th Feb 18, 8:28 AM
    • #9
    • 6th Feb 18, 8:28 AM
    Given CCs only make a tiny % on any transaction*, I don't blame them for avoiding transactions which could give them hassle - whether it's people demanding chargebacks/s75 (legitimately or not) or straightforward defaulting.

    (* true they make more if people are paying interest).
    Last edited by chattychappy; 06-02-2018 at 8:35 AM.
    • camelot1971
    • By camelot1971 6th Feb 18, 9:57 AM
    • 639 Posts
    • 1,001 Thanks
    camelot1971

    Would you repeal S75? What about chargeback? Surely people buying those Uggs (or whatever they are) from China for $10 knew the risk they were taking?
    Originally posted by chattychappy
    There is a definite line between things going wrong with a "routine" transaction and some idiot buying fakes from China for $10 and then complaining they were scammed.

    Some people really do need protecting from themselves but what is the solution?
    • zx81
    • By zx81 6th Feb 18, 10:01 AM
    • 15,545 Posts
    • 16,497 Thanks
    zx81

    Some people really do need protecting from themselves but what is the solution?
    Originally posted by camelot1971
    IQ tests as part of the credit application...

    • chattychappy
    • By chattychappy 6th Feb 18, 10:14 AM
    • 6,621 Posts
    • 3,560 Thanks
    chattychappy
    Personally I would repeal S75 altogether. But given that would be politically impossible, I would tidy it up as follows:

    1) Limit "cover" to twice the amount actually paid on the CC.
    2) Remove the 100/item limit, but limit claims to 100.
    3) Extend to additional cardholders.
    4) Extend cover to any situation where the CC "truly" finances a transaction. Ie tidy up the situation where acceptance is via third parties such as paypal.
    5) Remove cover for overseas merchants.
    • adindas
    • By adindas 6th Feb 18, 10:58 AM
    • 3,655 Posts
    • 2,077 Thanks
    adindas
    I see today on the news that credit card company's are refusing to give customers credit for bitcoin. This is great news, however it's a shame that MBNA didn't refuse me credit for Binary Options, I was scammed out of 18,000 and I now have to pay off this debt! Who's the winner here? Option.FM certainly, and of course MBNA, me? No, I'm now a nervous wreck, and in debt up to my neck!
    Originally posted by Irritated34
    Just in case you speculate in Bitcoin. In binary option BitCoin speculation you either win or lose. Some people are winners some are losers.

    In case you speculate, currently yow make a lost. But supposed you win in the Big Coin Speculation

    Are you going to initiate this thread ??

    Are you going to return the gain you have made from this speculation to MBNA ??

    When you apply for a credit card, did you tell them that you are going to use it to speculate in Bitcoin trading ??

    Many people do not mind to speculate in Bitcoin but they are fully aware that it is a pure speculation. When they make a lost they will not start blaming other people but themselves. Similarly if they make a gain they take it for themselves..

    The ability to take responsibility for their own action is the one which differentiate adults and children.
    Last edited by adindas; 06-02-2018 at 12:49 PM.
    • eco_warrior
    • By eco_warrior 6th Feb 18, 7:14 PM
    • 75 Posts
    • 26 Thanks
    eco_warrior
    I can see why they are doing it. I work in the cards industry and folk are losing money hand over fist via trading websites. Its a good move imo.
    • AllieKat
    • By AllieKat 6th Feb 18, 8:01 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 43 Thanks
    AllieKat
    It is a tricky issue - the extent to which CCs, banks and others can get involved in protecting people from bad decisions
    Originally posted by chattychappy
    This has nothing to do with protecting people from themselves. It's banks protecting themselves!
    • derps
    • By derps 6th Feb 18, 8:44 PM
    • 113 Posts
    • 105 Thanks
    derps
    This has nothing to do with protecting people from themselves. It's banks protecting themselves!
    Originally posted by AllieKat
    I'm not sure this follows - why wouldn't credit card companies want people to run up big debts that they have to pay off? Bitcoin isn't a scam that banks have to refund, it's just a risky investment that a lot of people stand to lose out on.
    • Richey_
    • By Richey_ 6th Feb 18, 8:46 PM
    • 305 Posts
    • 356 Thanks
    Richey_
    The OP gives a lot more away on their linked thread. They gambled 18,000 on a platform which from reading the pots further down advertises itself as being very risky. They bet high stakes and high risk and lost. They then tried the police, charge back and then s.75 and lost. Hence the debt.

    This is the first post by the OP but if you read through it explains a lot more.
    It reads like buying a lottery ticket and then expecting the credit card company to repay you if you lose...

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5598916

    Hello, I'm new to the forum so please excuse me if I get confused!

    Back in July 2016 I joined a Binary Option site called Option.fm.
    To cut a very long story short, I'm disabled and I was looking for a way to top up my monthly income as I have had to cut my working hours.

    The company looked legitimate and I signed up.

    Using their very clever ways, they promised that they could make me money by following the advice of their very experienced account managers.
    I did what the advised, but by the end of August I had lost all of my deposits, amounting to just under 18,000.00

    As soon as the account went down to next to nothing, I complained to the company but they did not help me. I contacted my credit card company, they were very sympathetic and after investigation started a chargeback. Last week they told me that it had been unsuccessful and that they were passing it onto Section 75. This department contacted me yesterday, and told me that they would have to contact the company involved, I stated that they would not get very far as this Binary options company were on many Internet forums, where other people had also been scammed. The gentleman at section 75 did not seem very interested, and did not inspire any confidence in me.
    I am going out of my mind with worry, as I can not afford this debt on my very small income.
    I have reported this scam to ActionFraud and have spoken to the police about this, they agreed that it was a scam.
    I have done some research and understand that if the Section 75 claim fails I can then take it to the financial ombudsman but there are no guarantees.
    If anyone can give me any advice I would be very grateful.
    Thank you
    Originally posted by Irritated34
    It included a later quote where they quoted the companies own website saying how risky it was...

    OP, you won't want to hear this but I think you'll need to wave goodbye to your money. You have undoubtedly been misled but not (in my opinion) to the extent that your card company will be prepared to bail you out by accepting liability for your trading (gambling) losses, not least because even a cursory glance at that site comes up with prominent warnings about the risks involved in trading, see https://option.fm/risk-warning/ for example

    Trading is Very Speculative and Risky. Trading in binary options is highly speculative, involves an outstanding risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone but only for those investors who:
    (a) understand and are willing to assume the economic, legal and other risks involved.
    (b) are financially able to assume the loss of their total investment
    (c) have the knowledge to understand binary options trading and the underlying assets.

    Customer represents, warrants and agrees that Customer understands these risks, is willing and able, financially and otherwise, to assume the risks of trading in binary options and that the loss of Customer!!! entire Account balance will not change Customer!!!
    Originally posted by eskbanker
    The risk warnings are still in there and cannot be any more clear what a high risk platform this is. https://option.fm/risk-warning/ Appears the OP got blown away in what they will spend their money on, gambled money they didnt have and lost
    Last edited by Richey_; 06-02-2018 at 8:59 PM.
    • Anthorn
    • By Anthorn 6th Feb 18, 8:52 PM
    • 3,453 Posts
    • 895 Thanks
    Anthorn
    Going by some of the posts on M.S.E. Forums some people get a credit card but don't know what it is, what it's for and how to "work" it. In addition they probably;ly don't know where they've been, where they're going what day it is nor probably their own age and gender.

    If card holders can't or won't protect themselves then the banks have to do it for them. Of course the banks are protecting themselves from irresponsible card holders running up large debts they don't have a cat-in-hell's chance of repaying!

    Good move Lloyds Banking Group!
    • AllieKat
    • By AllieKat 6th Feb 18, 9:10 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 43 Thanks
    AllieKat
    I'm not sure this follows - why wouldn't credit card companies want people to run up big debts that they have to pay off? Bitcoin isn't a scam that banks have to refund, it's just a risky investment that a lot of people stand to lose out on.
    Originally posted by derps
    That's exactly what they want... as long as you don't default and never pay it. They've calculated these debts have a high risk of going unpaid. Nothing more, nothing less.
    • chattychappy
    • By chattychappy 6th Feb 18, 10:06 PM
    • 6,621 Posts
    • 3,560 Thanks
    chattychappy
    That's exactly what they want... as long as you don't default and never pay it. They've calculated these debts have a high risk of going unpaid. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Originally posted by AllieKat
    I believe it is "at least a little" more!

    They fear a backlash from "irresponsible" lending. There is a lot of fuzzy grey law in regulation these days. Treating customers fairly, corporate social responsibility, facilitator liability, AML concerns etc. Now you can be as cynical as you like (I'm certainly cynical), but for some banks it's just not worth the risk - and these days by risk they don't just mean financial (as you say), but also reputational, regulatory or otherwise.
    Last edited by chattychappy; 06-02-2018 at 10:10 PM.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,455Posts Today

7,499Users online

Martin's Twitter