Chip 'n pin: MoneySavingExpert.com discussion

Former_MSE_Andrea

This discussion thread is related to the updated Chip 'n Pin article.

Click reply to discuss it here.

Basil_Fawlty

What about the elderly? Whenever I'm behind an OAP at the checkouts I am always able to see their pin because they just poke the keypad with one finger. What if someone saw their pin, mugged them round the corner and went on a shopping spree with the pin? The bank would wag their finger and say, "Sorry, they used your pin which isn't our responsibility - be more careful in future".

They have done it to protect themselves, not us. Why doesn't anyone see the flaws in the system?

James

Re Martins Article: The PIN Deadline. Are there Any Exceptions?

The article should advised that if anyone thinks they will have difficulty with a PIN, and this could include personal safety issues and PIN compliance (ATM fraud up 81% in 2004), then it is the cardholders or applicants perception if they can manage a PIN or not and not the card issuer.

Maybe Martin would like to ask APACS and card issuers on the behlaf of consumers - Where's the information about Chip & Signature Cards. If they are available, and they are, then card issuers should be complying with the Banking Code article 2 and 3.1.

CrazyChemist_2

I agree 100% with spaceage - I've actually spotted a few people's pins, and these aren't just the elderly - all ages of people simply aren't careful enough with being discreet and entering the pin. And if someone sees the pin number and then nicks the card, the bank won't reimburse as far as I can see. It's an absolute disgrace that the banks have been allowed to get away with shifting responsibility to the consumer. There are many many people out there who will end up having to pay for fraudulent transactions because the bank deems them 'irresponsible' with their PIN. :mad:

Myosin

spaceage wrote:

What about the elderly? Whenever I'm behind an OAP at the checkouts I am always able to see their pin because they just poke the keypad with one finger. What if someone saw their pin, mugged them round the corner and went on a shopping spree with the pin? The bank would wag their finger and say, "Sorry, they used your pin which isn't our responsibility - be more careful in future".

They have done it to protect themselves, not us. Why doesn't anyone see the flaws in the system?

Has Martin missed these problems with Chip and Pin?? These security problems were evident when pin numbers were used for cashpoints. How do these banks think that it's any different, now that PIN's are more widely used?

Oh of course, they don't have to pay the liability for fraudulent transactions - more cash in their coffers eh? :mad:

Joe_Bloggs

I have an American Express Blue card. It appears to have a chip but I suspect it is cosmetic. I always have to sign with this card. American Express have tried to assure me that the card will still be accepted after the PIN deadline and for the 18 months to the expiry date. Is this a fact, wishful thinking, or a situation dependent lottery ?
J_B.

King_Of_Fools

Joe_Bloggs wrote:

I have an American Express Blue card. It appears to have a chip but I suspect it is cosmetic. I always have to sign with this card. American Express have tried to assure me that the card will still be accepted after the PIN deadline and for the 18 months to the expiry date. Is this a fact, wishful thinking, or a situation dependent lottery ?

What you have is an early chip card that is not PIN-enabled - these are now known as Chip & Signature cards. When the chip is read it will be asked if it is Chip & PIN it will reply "no" and the till will then print a signature receipt instead of asking you to enter your PIN.

You will be able to use this card anywhere until it expires. Amex will then issue you with a Chip & PIN card.

theraven1979_2

Just to add to that - Amex offers the following advice on their site:-


"I have been told by staff in shops that they will not accept my American Express card without a PIN

This is not true.

YOU WILL BE ABLE TO USE YOUR EXISTING CARD AND CONTINUE TO SIGN AS NORMAL IN ALL SHOPS THAT ACCEPT THE AMERICAN EXPRESS CARD - EVEN IF THEY HAVE UPGRADED TO THE NEW CHIP AND PIN TECHNOLOGY.

We are aware that some stores have experienced training issues when the new technology was initially introduced, where staff may say they will not accept signature only cards. This is NOT the case. You WILL be able to use your card, and continue to sign for transactions. We are taking your feedback and are working with these stores to ensure that they are given the correct information.

Even as retailers move to Chip and PIN, they must support the use of traditional signature cards. This allows a phased introduction of Chip and PIN cards over time and also acceptance of signature cards from overseas customers traveling to the UK. Disabled customers who are unable to use a PIN will need to be supported indefinitely.

The end of 2005 is NOT a deadline for the transition to Chip and PIN cards, neither is 15th February 2006. Magnetic stripe/signature cards will continue to be in circulation indefinitely. "

King_Of_Fools wrote:

What you have is an early chip card that is not PIN-enabled - these are now known as Chip & Signature cards. When the chip is read it will be asked if it is Chip & PIN it will reply "no" and the till will then print a signature receipt instead of asking you to enter your PIN.

You will be able to use this card anywhere until it expires. Amex will then issue you with a Chip & PIN card.

daveboy

If a card is used, say, before the cardholder receives it due to it being stolen in transit then I'd expect the banks to foot the bill.

But using PIN numbers in shops for transactions is something this country should have had long ago.

A change like this always brings the "what about" questions.

I am responsible for the security of my cards just as much as the next guy in the street is.

What about pensioners? From what I keep reading it shouldn't affect a lot of them as they keep it in a jar in a cupboard at home and let people who claim to be from the waterboard in to take it that way anyway, despite constantly being warned about it.

I'm all for banks paying for clear cases of fraud.

I just don't buy the "what about pensioners" line at all.

It's 4 numbers you don't tell anyone else. Not rocket science....is it?

James

"If it makes your customers feel safer, why would you not want to do it?"

I thought the above quote referred to a Chip and Signature card.

How about this - a Chip, Signature and Photo card. The only time a crook could use such a card in a 'Chipped,' environment is between the time the card is lost and that loss reported and if, a big if, shops staff failed to check the photo on the card?

On the other hand, a crook caputers your PIN, clones or steals your card (or cards) and using the same window of opportunity can hit any cashpoint, or chip & PIN shop without ever being challenged.

From a safety perspective I've opted for Chip & Signature, but I know which card I'd much prefer.

The quoted article:

http://money.independent.co.uk/personal_finance/loans_credit/article338425.ece

raa_thistle

I may be missing something, but how is someone seeing your pin and stealing the card any different from someone simply stealing the card, looking at the signature on the back of the card and then faking it? How is it safer to have the security device physically on the card than to have it seperate and the theif have to fluke seeing the pin?