Stolen Card Used At Atm With Pin

James

olly300 wrote: »

Can you find me information that shows this?

From APACS, the people who brought you Chip & PIN


If someone else uses your card before you tell your bank or building society that it has been lost or stolen, or before you tell them that someone else knows your PIN, the most you will have to pay is £50. In practice the bank or building society will usually refund the full amount lost, but if you are shown to have acted fraudulently or without reasonable care, for example by keeping your PIN written down with your card, you may have to meet all the losses.




Card Watch.

Tootsie_Roll

James wrote: »

You may find this information from WatchDog Investigates informative:

Some Banks are refusing to refund customers whose chip-and-pin cards have been used fraudulently.

For article click here.

Check your private messages.

As usual a link to a misleading article !

olly300

All ATM's have been chip read only since April '06 for all multi function cards and those with a chip. Some cards that come with basic bank accounts don't have a chip so those are mag strip read instead. Since that date (despite the boffs on the watchdog program) there have been zero instances of ATM fraud using chip and pin - banks can tell if the original card and pin is used and use that as their 'defence' in these cases. After all there is no way a fraudster can get your original card and pin unless as in this case they 'shoulder surf' you and then steal your card. Even if this is the case the bank may refund the money, especially if it takes you into the red wherein slightly different rules apply. I get all this information from my wife who works in card fraud for one of the big banks.

To give you another example my wife had a case this weekend where the account holder reported £3k missing from their account. It transpired that the original card was used (that they had confirmed recepit of) and the transactions were chip read with the correct pin (all of them). They were adamant they had not taken the money out despite all transactions taking place at two atm's within a mile of their home and claimed they had never used the card. Now they also had an 18 year old son who lived at home but they refused to accept that he could be responsible - not surprisingly the claim was declined and my wife suggested they try and get the cctv footage. Who do you think was right ?

My only problem with this was that theft defiantely occured here (albeit the son) and the bank would not report it as not their loss but the police were not interested either as the bank weren't reporting it. It seems that some police forces are not interpreting the rules correctly.

masonic

Tootsie_Roll wrote: »

If it was the genuine card which was chip read AND the pin was used then it would be up to the OP to prove they were not negligent, not the bank.

I know this is the policy of some banks, but Section 12.12 of the banking code states:-

"Unless we can show that you have acted fraudulently or without reasonable care, your liability will be limited as follows.
- If someone else uses your card, before you tell us it has been lost or stolen or that someone knows your PIN, the most you have to pay is £50."

The Financial Ombudsman service are bound to treat the customer fairly in disputes. If a bank has signed up to the banking code, then a customer can reasonably expect the conditions of the code to be enforced. Therefore, the FOS's hands are tied. They must side with the customer, or the BBA must change the banking code.

James

masonic wrote: »

I know this is the policy of some banks, but Section 12.12 of the banking code states:-

If a bank has signed up to the banking code, then a customer can reasonably expect the conditions of the code to be enforced. Therefore, the FOS's hands are tied. They must side with the customer, or the BBA must change the banking code.

Therefore the first question asked by any victim who finds themselves in this posiiton should be "show me the evidence that I was negligent with my PIN" (Then if this evidence is forth coming - warn the rest of us).

Victims could also mention the numerous methods used by crooks to acquire PINs. This ranges from simple should surfing and camera phones to the doctoring of PIN entry devices, bogus ATMs and key logging software.

smithja

I know the odds are not that high but there is a chance of someone guessing a PIN number, and getting it right within 3 goes (it been a while since I was at school but i think it would be ((1/9999)x(2/9998)x(3/9997))) providing a different number was used each time and if you subtract the chance of the PIN being all the same digit (as the bank wont allow you to change it to that) then the probability that it is guessed is higher. So for every case that comes to a banks attention there will be a probability albeit quite small that some one simply entered random numbers and hit the right one.James

debbie42

smithja wrote: »

I know the odds are not that high but there is a chance of someone guessing a PIN number, and getting it right within 3 goes (it been a while since I was at school but i think it would be ((1/9999)x(2/9998)x(3/9997))) providing a different number was used each time and if you subtract the chance of the PIN being all the same digit (as the bank wont allow you to change it to that) then the probability that it is guessed is higher. So for every case that comes to a banks attention there will be a probability albeit quite small that some one simply entered random numbers and hit the right one.James

If the bank won't allow 4 consecutive numbers (do they?), then you've got a range of 0000-9999, i.e. 10000 -10 (for the 4), so that's 9990. If they have 3 guesses to get it right then the chances of them hitting it are 3 in 9990, i.e 1 in 3330.

I think: it's a long time since I did stats, too. My children would probably be more up on it than me

Stubbarama

The odds would be 3/10000, You dont times the equations, because it doesnt become harder the more you try, and you dont divide into the odds i.e 2/9998 because this makes it 1/4999, meaning you lost 4999 combinations. Its 10000 because you most probably didnt count 0000 as a combination.

smithja

I should know how to do it I have a degree in a science, but cannot remember the rule in probabilty for dependent and non-dependent events. My main point is thought, that if people guess the number, someone will eventually get it right. However, I think that because you cancelled the card it should not even be an issue, unless it was used before you cancel it. Under the law as I understand it, they will have to show it was you that used the card rather than the other way around, i.e. you are presumed innocent until found guilty, as they are implying you are "at it" at the moment, which would be fraud of some sort.James

smithja

Hi Stubbarama, I dont think you are right. The odds of winning the national lottery are 1/49x2/48x3/47 etc.. until you get to 6/44 which comes out at 13 million to one. Once you have tried one PIN number and it fails, you would then try another at that point you have a reduced number of possible correct outcomes, so the number of possible correct outcomes is reduced by 1, then again by 1, if you need a third try.James

debbie42

smithja wrote: »

Once you have tried one PIN number and it fails, you would then try another at that point you have a reduced number of possible correct outcomes, so the number of possible correct outcomes is reduced by 1, then again by 1, if you need a third try.

If you wanted to allow for that then that changes my figures from 3/9990 to 1/9990+1/9989+1/9988. It's an addition though, not a multiple. That makes a bit of a difference.