Stores that DON'T accept contactless payments - name and shame!

masonic

Ballard wrote: »

Really? That's madness. It isn't the bank's fault that you were careless with your card so why should they stump up?

Ballard wrote: »

Surely dropping your card in the street is negligent.

It depends on the circumstances. Unless the card issuer can prove negligence, they must treat customers fairly and not presume guilt. One of the key advantages of spending on a card is that the issuer indemnifies you from losses resulting from unauthorised use of your card. They don't do that out of the kindness of their hearts. It is the result of part regulation and part encouraging adoption and use so that they can benefit from transaction fees.

Mr_Singleton

colsten wrote: »

Sounds like you are only against world domination because your open source model hasn't achieved world domination. And it never will, as it is fundamentally flawed.

Your funny.

60% of all the web servers on the internet run Apache which is Open Source. That includes companies like BBC.com, PayPal and Apple.com. Talking of Apple what's its underlying OS? BSD Unix.... which is open source.

OpenSource SQL is causing (proprietary) Oracle serious problems...

"Oracle (ORCL) declared its fiscal 4Q15 and 2015 earnings results on June 17, 2015. The company missed another earnings target and blamed the strong dollar (UUP) for its performance. However, the growing preference for open-source technologies and databases also plays a crucial role in Oracle’s recent struggles"

Ballard

masonic wrote: »

It depends on the circumstances. Unless the card issuer can prove negligence, they must treat customers fairly and not presume guilt. One of the key advantages of spending on a card is that the issuer indemnifies you from losses resulting from unauthorised use of your card. They don't do that out of the kindness of their hearts. It is the result of part regulation and part encouraging adoption and use so that they can benefit from transaction fees.

Surely the customer must assume some responsibility. Theft is one thing but carelessness is quite another. Speaking personally, if I dropped my card and suffered a loss I'd put it down to my stupidity rather than expect the bank to pay.

inholms

Contactless cards are a good idea and I hope all stores will switch over to them. Anything that speeds up shopping is great. However this is all undermined in all shops by people exchanging vouchers at the till. In the last two weeks I have stood in the que at M&S ,Waitrose and Tescos for ages waiting for all in front of me exchanging vouchers adding up to 20 minutes of checkout time and thus undermining the whole concept of faster checkouts. I do hope the stores read these comments as I see this as a growing problem.

Steve_xx

Ballard wrote: »

Surely the customer must assume some responsibility. Theft is one thing but carelessness is quite another. Speaking personally, if I dropped my card and suffered a loss I'd put it down to my stupidity rather than expect the bank to pay.

Dropping your card isn't "stupidity", it's an accident that you wouldn't want to happen. On the other hand, leaving your card on the table in a cafe might be viewed as "stupidity" but at the end of the day you wouldn't willingly comit either of the above.

If someone else got hold of the card then they could buy goods and services at your expense. Hard to say who is liable in either case but in effect the bank has released monies to someone other than you. The bank has foisted these 'contactless' cards onto people, so should they be liable? Probably they should on the face of it, and probably they will be until, and if, there are huge losses as a result and at that point there will have to be another layer of security added, Fingerprinting comes to mind,

Steve_xx

inholms wrote: »

Contactless cards are a good idea and I hope all stores will switch over to them. Anything that speeds up shopping is great. However this is all undermined in all shops by people exchanging vouchers at the till. In the last two weeks I have stood in the que at M&S ,Waitrose and Tescos for ages waiting for all in front of me exchanging vouchers adding up to 20 minutes of checkout time and thus undermining the whole concept of faster checkouts. I do hope the stores read these comments as I see this as a growing problem.

I don't mind waiting for people at the tills if they want to use chip and pin etc, or even cash. What constantly irritates me at tills is when people have huge amounts of groceries going through and then at the end of it all they then, and only then, start to search for their respective wallet/purse/method of payment like they never realised that all this kit would have to be paid for at the end of the scanning process.

masonic

Ballard wrote: »

Surely the customer must assume some responsibility. Theft is one thing but carelessness is quite another. Speaking personally, if I dropped my card and suffered a loss I'd put it down to my stupidity rather than expect the bank to pay.

It is the banks responsibility to ensure the system is sufficiently secure. They can do this in two ways - either by ensuring I am making the transaction by requiring me to enter my PIN (which it is my responsibility to keep secret), or by reimbursing me for transactions in which they have been careless in not requesting that information. Possession of a card in and of itself should not be sufficient for anyone to access funds. It is a balance between security and convenience that the card issuers need to find - customers are not in a position to influence the system - so card issuers need to underwrite any risks they introduce into the system through lax security.

Presumably the card issuers are comfortable with the level of fraud originating from contactless transactions and are willing to write that off as a cost of doing business against the larger volume of transaction fees they are able to make now that a convenience barrier to paying by card has been removed.

Of course, it is up to you whether or not you request/accept a refund for losses where you lose your card and it is used fraudulently.

Ballard

Steve_xx wrote: »

Dropping your card isn't "stupidity", it's an accident that you wouldn't want to happen. On the other hand, leaving your card on the table in a cafe might be viewed as "stupidity" but at the end of the day you wouldn't willingly comit either of the above.

I disagree. Adults should have the wherewithal to keep control of their possessions. If I put my card back in my wallet and that into my pocket I won't drop it on the street. Failure to do either of those simple things ranks as stupidity to me.

I dropped one of my cards in Tescos earlier this year (thankfully someone alerted me to it). I was stupid not to have taken care.

If you want a debit or credit card then you should be aware of the associated risks. If these are too great then cash cheques in your branch and stick to cash.

colsten

Mr_Singleton wrote: »

Your funny.

I also know something about grammar. It seems you don't.

Steve_xx

Ballard wrote: »

I disagree. Adults should have the wherewithal to keep control of their possessions. If I put my card back in my wallet and that into my pocket I won't drop it on the street. Failure to do either of those simple things ranks as stupidity to me.

I dropped one of my cards in Tescos earlier this year (thankfully someone alerted me to it). I was stupid not to have taken care.

If you want a debit or credit card then you should be aware of the associated risks. If these are too great then cash cheques in your branch and stick to cash.

Adults do have the wherewithal to look after their things, in general. But adults like all other beings are human, and therefore capable of unintended mistake. Banks, on the other hand owe a duty of care to not give their customers money out to any ne'er do well. If the banks orchestrate and bring about a system like 'contactless' then the onus must be on them to ensure its security.

Going back to your analogy of the perfect human being who puts his cards in his wallet etc, and therefore is not vulnerable. What if this adult was to develop Dementia? What security would there be for such a person who has, up until now perhaps, been of sound mind?