Must cardholder be present to receive a refund?

tanith

Whenever I have wanted a refund I always have to sign my sig ...

bitemebankers

KeithP wrote: »

I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I merely made a suggestion.

No problem - I just wondered why you thought it was fraud. I'm not a lawyer either, but I can't see how this could possibly be construed as fraud.

Actually, thinking about it again, sounds more like theft.

Theft from whom?

What do you think? Surely getting money from the card company without their permission is illegal, whatever the crime?

I think it's a technical breach of the card issuer's T&Cs.

4743hudsonj

Our PDQ providers state it as fraud plain and simple. You are using somebody elses money which you have no authorisation to do so (from the bank). My work make a habit of glancing at the name as the most common "fraud" is partners swapping cards etc. This means we can decline a sale to a male if his card state mrs. Obviously not fullproof but at least were vigilant on both sides of the sale.

SPANIEL36

when i worked in retail and had to issue refunds it was refuned via the way it was paid even if it was onto someone elses card. so paid with card refunded to card. many a time we had someone return a gift with a receipt and if it was paid for by the purchasers card it was refunded to the returners card

Nukumai

The store's policy is - understandably - in place to protect themselves against fraudulent use of credit cards. Fair enough...if you don't like a store's policies, shop elsewhere.

However, that doesn't mean that every circumstance of somebody else using another's card is criminal/fraudulent - eg. the OP's situation. A shop assistant will, in all likelihood, not act outside the procedure - even when common sense might suggest otherwise; which, whilst frustrating at times, is - from their perspective - understandable.

As an aside, I find the "be grateful that they will even give you a refund" comments a little spiteful and childish...not to mention irrelevant.

bitemebankers

4743hudsonj wrote: »

Our PDQ providers state it as fraud plain and simple.

Really? So how does that make it law?

4743hudsonj

bitemebankers wrote: »

Really? Perhaps you'd care to explain how your PDQ provider has managed to re-write common law then?

Dont shoot the messenger!

I'm just repeating what i was told when i had to do a referral. Beside i never referred to it being common law, merely their terms of use and what they consider fraudulent use.

On another note, care to point to the common law you think they have "re-written".