HSBC Contactless Card

Gromitt

gusgorman wrote: »

It might be small in comparison - but as has been mentioned again, and again and again in multiple threads on this forum, any amount is far too much for someone who doesn't want the feature on their card in the first place.

If your card is stolen, I don't think most theives first thing to do with it is to buy a coffee or burger, more likely to purchase items over the internet or phone for significantly higher values.

gusgorman wrote: »

(Also - £10 is alot of money for some people)

And they'll get it back the same day they report it.

As has been said time and time again, if you don't want the feature, ask for a card without it, but chances are that in the future if you state you don't want Contactless, you will not get CnP either (ie, an ATM only card)

gusgorman

Gromitt wrote: »

If your card is stolen, I don't think most theives first thing to do with it is to buy a coffee or burger, more likely to purchase items over the internet or phone for significantly higher values.

But the context of this is that we were talking about actual examples of people using contactless rather than doing internet shopping.

Gromitt wrote: »

And they'll get it back the same day they report it.

But the onus is on the card user to spot and report it. I'd rather not have the responibilty to look for fraud (however small) that utilizes a feature I don't want (not only talking about stolen cards here, of course)

Gromitt wrote: »

As has been said time and time again, if you don't want the feature, ask for a card without it

Pretty much the whole reason for all the people complaining about contactless is that some banks are already refusing to issue cards without it.

JuicyJesus

gusgorman wrote: »

But the onus is on the card user to spot and report it. I'd rather not have the responibilty to look for fraud (however small) that utilizes a feature I don't want (not only talking about stolen cards here, of course)

You have that responsibility whether you have contactless or not.

And it's impossible for someone to defraud you using contactless if they don't physically have the card. So keep your card safe and amazingly the risk goes away completely.

If you don't want to use the feature, don't use it. You are at no more risk than if it's not there. Card not present fraud is the biggest card fraud "sector" but you don't see people who never shop online whinging that the bank gave them a card number and a CVV code.

gusgorman

JuicyJesus wrote: »

You have that responsibility whether you have contactless or not.

Very true. But that doesn't contradict the point I was trying to make at all. I don't want the likelihood of fraud to increase because of a feature I don't use.

JuicyJesus wrote: »

And it's impossible for someone to defraud you using contactless if they don't physically have the card. So keep your card safe and amazingly the risk goes away completely.

Thats not true.

JuicyJesus wrote: »

If you don't want to use the feature, don't use it. You are at no more risk than if it's not there.

So obviously not true.

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Card not present fraud is the biggest card fraud "sector" but you don't see people who never shop online whinging that the bank gave them a card number and a CVV code.

If there is a precedent for people being being victims of fraud because of features they don't need or want then it should be learnt from.

Hominu

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

It all depends on the card holder's normal spending pattern. Security alerts are triggered by changes in buying patterns more than the sum.

If I try and do more than 3 contactless transactions in a day I'm asked for my PIN, so regardless of normal spending patterns, if someone steals my card, they can do 3 contactless transactions before it gets blocked, unless they know my PIN, and if they knew that why bother with contactless - just visit an ATM and ask for the maximum allowed.

Gromitt

gusgorman wrote: »

But the context of this is that we were talking about actual examples of people using contactless rather than doing internet shopping.

Yes, but you were saying how the card could be used if it was lost or stolen, I was just saying that contactless fraud is not going to be the biggest problem here - if someone has your card details they are going to be using it for much more.

gusgorman wrote: »

But the onus is on the card user to spot and report it.

Which is exactly the same as CnP, so you are already doing it.

Furthermore, to make it even easier, lots of banks will inform you of transactions you have made. Some even text you if they think a transaction is unusual. I received such a text yesterday saying "We have processed a transaction to your card ending 1234 for £4.99 Paypal *News, please phone 12345678901 if you do not recognise this transaction".

Hominu

gusgorman wrote: »

Very true. But that doesn't contradict the point I was trying to make at all. I don't want the likelihood of fraud to increase because of a feature I don't use.

Then you need to find a bank which will give you a card without said feature. These are becoming more and more difficult to find. Remember that the bank isn't there for you, the bank is there to make money and be a secure and convenient place to store your cash.

gusgorman wrote: »

Thats not true.

Correct, they can make a single transaction if they manage to authenticate and retrieve details from your card. After that transaction the details are useless and can't be reused and if the card holder uses the card before you do, the details are useless from that point.

amiehall

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

A cashier shouldn't actually touch the card any more, but you find that some do.

There is a huge number of cloned cards about at the moment. Most are registered in America, and a huge number are American Express.
I don't know where you work, but credit card fraud is very common.

Are you talking about fake chip and pin cards? If not, I would say that we process an average of 1 signed for transaction a month. Obviously most (all?) of these are genuine tourists. I don't see a large scale fraud here. I can be sure that if my firm were having to repay banks for fraudulent transactions in my store, it would be coming out of my budget!

gusgorman

Hominu wrote: »

Then you need to find a bank which will give you a card without said feature.
These are becoming more and more difficult to find.

Absolutely. Or drill a small hole in your card to break the antenna.

Hominu wrote: »

Remember that the bank isn't there for you, the bank is there to make money and be a secure and convenient place to store your cash.

If it is supposed to be a secure place to store your cash, then surely it is fair enough to expect a card which contains the minimum security holes?

Hominu wrote: »

Correct, they can make a single transaction if they manage to authenticate and retrieve details from your card. After that transaction the details are useless and can't be reused and if the card holder uses the card before you do, the details are useless from that point.

Agreed.

gusgorman

Gromitt wrote: »

Which is exactly the same as CnP, so you are already doing it.

It is a nonsense argument to say that because you need to check your account for fraud anyway, then we may as well open a few more security holes.

Gromitt wrote: »

Furthermore, to make it even easier, lots of banks will inform you of transactions you have made. Some even text you if they think a transaction is unusual. I received such a text yesterday saying "We have processed a transaction to your card ending 1234 for £4.99 Paypal *News, please phone 12345678901 if you do not recognise this transaction".

That is very useful. Good feature!