Credit Card Security Code

cajef

Historyfanatic wrote: »

I think and We all know I assume, that banks and credit card companies will wriggle furiously to get out of their legal obligations despite rulings by the Ombudsman.
Does anyone know the law on this?

Corrected that for you and I would ask your senior lawyer friend about the law on this not people on an internet forum.

DCFC79

Historyfanatic wrote: »

No, I just got bored with the endless stream of unhelpful comments. For those of you (and there seem to be a surprising number) who believe that banks always obey the law, google chip & pin fraud. The first article is about how, despite a direct instruction by the Financial Services Ombudsman, banks still tried to evade and even deny their responsibilities under the law.
This particular case involves the security code, not the PIN, but I cannot see any difference in principle. PINs are used in transactions in person and Codes are used in online or telephone transactions. I've given my chum some helpful articles to look at and recommended that he challenges his bank manager's decision.

List the process that happened ?

Have you read that article ?

p00hsticks

Historyfanatic wrote: »

This particular case involves the security code, not the PIN, but I cannot see any difference in principle. PINs are used in transactions in person and Codes are used in online or telephone transactions.

There is a massive difference in principle between the two.

The CVV (security code) is intended to be shared with the retailer when the card is not physically present during the transaction.

Although the PIN is entered during a face to face transaction, it is entered by the card holder themselves - the PIN is not to be disclosed by the cardholder to anyone - doing so would breach the card issuers T & Cs and may result in the banks considering the cardholder responsible for any subsequent loss.

eskbanker

Historyfanatic wrote: »

No, I just got bored with the endless stream of unhelpful comments. For those of you (and there seem to be a surprising number) who believe that banks always obey the law, google chip & pin fraud. The first article is about how, despite a direct instruction by the Financial Services Ombudsman, banks still tried to evade and even deny their responsibilities under the law.

I think you'll find that most people were trying to cut through all the unhelpful emotive and opinionated stuff about how banks are all trying to shaft people at every opportunity, in order to get to the facts, from which a reasonable conclusion should be reached.

If you were looking for people to nod along and say "yes, banks are all evil" then you wouldn't be the first or last to do so, but it doesn't really move things forward at all for you or your friend does it?

jonesMUFCforever

Historyfanatic - 7 posts - after each one posters have asked for exactly what happened - response - more useless info not in any way related to what happened. Someone used the t-word me thinks a time waster.