How to avoid Contactless cards?

[Deleted User]

DoA wrote: »

And if you only have one?

Get one, then call up the bank and say you lost it, carry both the cancelled one and the working replacement one.

cos_2

Bravehearted wrote: »

When it does happen that a contactless card is used fraudulently - the same way your safe secure wallet of physical money can be stolen - you call your bank, report it, they sort it and refund you.

I fully understand the point is that fraud via contactless is very unlikely and can be dealt with like any other MO, but just wanted to make a wee comment to highlight that getting the fraud sorted out can take time, cause a lot of upset/misery and even some cost, and should never be dismissed lightly. (Not saying you did!)

Years ago my debit card account was scammed for nearly £7k. Several phone calls, police at the house, more calls etc. For a month I had around £500 to live on, and ended up using CCs to pay for the usual monthly stuff. It wasn't fun.

Anyway, I hadn't really understood much about this wireless application of the card until recently, and this thread has again raised my awareness, so thanks to all for their contributions. I'm off to wrap my cards in tinfoil now :rotfl:

zerog

I wrapped my contactless card in tin foil and have no problems with my Oyster which is stored next to it. I don't use the card that often so it isn't a big deal to unwrap... but my main spending cards aren't contactless (yet) so I don't know how long this solution will last.

And about "real" money... using a card to pay is more "real" since it signifies that the bank is willing to obtain goods and services for me in return for my future labour. When I hand over a five pound note I am technically declaring that the Bank of England owes me 5 pounds (of what? eggs?) and that I wish to transfer the obligation of the BoE to the person I am paying. That's completely meaningless.

BugsyBrowne

zerog wrote: »

I wrapped my contactless card in tin foil and have no problems with my Oyster which is stored next to it. I don't use the card that often so it isn't a big deal to unwrap... but my main spending cards aren't contactless (yet) so I don't know how long this solution will last.

And about "real" money... using a card to pay is more "real" since it signifies that the bank is willing to obtain goods and services for me in return for my future labour. When I hand over a five pound note I am technically declaring that the Bank of England owes me 5 pounds (of what? eggs?) and that I wish to transfer the obligation of the BoE to the person I am paying. That's completely meaningless.

You wrap your contactless card up in tin foil???

God give me strength....

I knew it this country has finally gone insane.

Hominu

BugsyBrowne wrote: »

You wrap your contactless card up in tin foil???

Must be quite a surprise when they come to pay for something in store, pull out this blob of tin foil and start unwrapping there card, and then wrap it up again before putting it back in the wallet.

That night someone steals the till roll and uses the information contained on it to defraud the card holder.

Contactless is too much hassle for any serious fraudster to bother, and the not so serious will not have the equipment required.

ianpop1

If you take a look at a company called gizmopromotions they have a card which goes in your wallet to shield from unwanted scanning standard or personalised, also protects other cards like season tickets and the new hotel keys which use the same technology. Your e-passport will have the same kind of chip and they do that size too.

richard734

You are more likely to have your pocket picked than suffer a contactless fraud from info still in your wallet.

I wish everyone would calm down about this, they may not advertise it, but your UK cards have been contactless capable for years! I have been using 'Normal' cards as contactless in the USA since at least 2008.

gusgorman

Bravehearted wrote: »

When it does happen that a contactless card is used fraudulently - the same way your safe secure wallet of physical money can be stolen - you call your bank, report it, they sort it and refund you.

Hominu wrote: »

So I carry around my contactless card in my unshielded wallet. If I get scammed, I'll just report it. I'll only worry if it starts getting regular, which I doubt it will.

These arguments are nonsense for justifying contactless technology. If someone doesn't want to make contactless payments, it's stupid to add an extra security hole to the card they are carrying.

I check my bank statement every month, but I definitely don't want the added onus of having to check for fraudulent contactless transactions, however small the chance that they might occur.

Hominu

Were you saying that when they changed your ATM card into a debit card?

Were you saying that when they introduced chip and pin to replace the swipe and sign?

No ? So whats the difference with contactless?

As the technology grows it will get more and more cost prohibitive to have cards which do not have the technology.

However, you can still get cards which are ATM access only, but you'll still be checking to make sure no one has withdrawn money from your account fraudulently.

gusgorman

Hominu wrote: »

Were you saying that when they changed your ATM card into a debit card?

No. Because despite the extra security vulnerabilities I was eager to use the new functionality.

Hominu wrote: »

Were you saying that when they introduced chip and pin to replace the swipe and sign?

No. Because, although there is still the possibility of fraud with chip and pin, overall it is more secure.

Hominu wrote: »

No ? So whats the difference with contactless?

It adds a new vulnerability which I think is totally unnecessary because I don't want or need the functionality. I actually think it borders on the moronic to manufacture a card that can have money taken out of it by a device that comes within range. Totally stupid!

Hominu wrote: »

As the technology grows it will get more and more cost prohibitive to have cards which do not have the technology.

Yes, I agree, it would be more expensive. But just because distributing 2 types of cards will cost the banks more money that doesn't mean they shouldn't do it if that is what alot of their customers want.

(And anyway - you wouldn't necessarily have to distribute 2 types of cards to give your customers the option. You could just let them opt out which would disable the functionality on their account)

Hominu wrote: »

However, you can still get cards which are ATM access only, but you'll still be checking to make sure no one has withdrawn money from your account fraudulently.

Yes - but the risk of fraud is reduced. That is the key point here.