Chip & PIN Security goes on Trial

Alex_LS

That was a mandate from Visa & MasterCard. Photos on cards isn't.

Paul_Herring

More details on Ms Woolf's case - it doesn't appear to have progressed much however:

http://www.itworld.com/security/72073/uk-couple-chases-bank-over-phantom-withdrawals

But Abbey National instructed Woolf to destroy the card and give it back to the bank. That advice -- which other banks have given as well in similar cases -- is the equivalent of immediately cremating a murder victim, said Murdoch [a security researcher].

"The banks shouldn't be destroying cards," he said.

Groman [Ms Woolf's partner] said he still has the card but it's in small pieces. But Murdoch said it is possible the microchip, which is much smaller than the silver or gold contact point on the card, could be intact. That chip has information on the number of transactions conducted with the card.

AlistairKelman

Hi,
I am now Counsel for Emma. I previously brought the group action against all the UK banks and building societies over phantom withdrawals in 1992/3.

Emma is using a version of my ATM Preservation Letter which is available on my website. On the ATM Preservation letter webpage are fairly detailed instructions on what to do with your bank or building society if you have suffered a "phantom withdrawal" in 2009.

Anyone (Martin please note) can freely download my draft and use it in a dispute with their bank or building society. Unfortunately as a "new user" under this forum's rules I am not allowed to put the URLs in this posting. So to find it you need to go to www[dot]alikelman[dot]com and click on the link "Automatic Teller Machines". This will take you to a series of pages including the page ATM Preservation Letter. There is a link on this page labelled "here" where you can download a PDF of my draft letter.

Enjoy

Alistair Kelman

Paul_Herring

ATM Preservation Letter links:
Explanation: http://www.alikelman.com/page32.htm
Template: http://www.alikelman.com/ATM-preserve.pdf

neo123_2

Further update on how Abbey continue to treat their loyal customers (Full Story Times 21st November 2009 - (consumer Affairs - article 6925373)

Case study: forced to seek redress in the courts

Emma Woolf, 28, lost almost £10,000 after her Abbey business account was hijacked by fraudsters. The bank refused to compensate her and she took her case to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

However, after seven months she gave up hope of receiving a fair decision and is taking Abbey to court.

Ms Woolf was horrified to discover in March that fraudsters had been draining her funds for three months, mainly by making withdrawals at cash machines of up to £500. Abbey said it would not refund the money because the correct PIN had been used and the withdrawals were made near Ms Woolf’s home in Mill Hill, northwest London. However, she kept her card locked securely in a safe and has never written down the PIN or told the number to anyone. She was out of London when several of the cash withdrawals were made.

She says: “All the fraudulent transactions do not have any reference numbers, which is very suspicious. We have so far spent £3,000 in solicitors fees and my business is unable to trade because I have lost so much money to the fraudsters.”

Abbey refused to comment.

Paul_Herring

neo123 wrote: »

[...]

Link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/consumer_affairs/article6925373.ece

INT1

neo123 wrote: »

Further update on how Abbey continue to treat their loyal customers (Full Story Times 21st November 2009 - (consumer Affairs - article 6925373)

Case study: forced to seek redress in the courts

Emma Woolf, 28, lost almost £10,000 after her Abbey business account was hijacked by fraudsters. The bank refused to compensate her and she took her case to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

However, after seven months she gave up hope of receiving a fair decision and is taking Abbey to court.

Ms Woolf was horrified to discover in March that fraudsters had been draining her funds for three months, mainly by making withdrawals at cash machines of up to £500. Abbey said it would not refund the money because the correct PIN had been used and the withdrawals were made near Ms Woolf’s home in Mill Hill, northwest London. However, she kept her card locked securely in a safe and has never written down the PIN or told the number to anyone. She was out of London when several of the cash withdrawals were made.

She says: “All the fraudulent transactions do not have any reference numbers, which is very suspicious. We have so far spent £3,000 in solicitors fees and my business is unable to trade because I have lost so much money to the fraudsters.”

Abbey refused to comment.

Isit Chip and PIN transactions or Cash taken out on a Counterfeit card?

Paul_Herring

Isit Chip and PIN transactions or Cash taken out on a Counterfeit card?

We don't know. Abbey appear to be claiming the former, Emma is denying it (and thus implying the latter) saying the card never left her safe.

INT1

Should really be a clearcut case then, Abbey should be obtaining the authorisation details off Visa or Mastercard to verify officially that the point of sale data is Chip read. If it isn't chip read, this sort of case to hold her liable wouldn't stand up in an Ombudsman complaint let alone a court!

Paul_Herring

What point of sale? Have you even bothered reading about the case or even the previous posts here? It was a cash machine in her area.

And the only sure-fire way of determining whether or not her card was used is to examine the chip on her card. Which Abbey told her to destroy ages ago and send back to them (it was cut up, but she still retains the pieces, and it may still be able to be read.)