Fraud on a Credit Card

yellowplum

I wanted to find out how, if there are any process that a credit card issuer must follow if a card member suspects fraud on there account?

A friend has recently returned from abroad and logged into his account with the Post Office MasterCard only to find that the card has been used in his absence by someone/somehow.

Looking at the transactions they seem like online transactions.

However after calling the Post Office (or BOI) to deal with this matter he was informed that they where not fraudulent transactions and he entered his pin number, bit difficult in mid air and in a completely different country, but anyway.

I was slightly taken aback by the reaction of the post office, as they didn't even cancel the card and issue a new one to prevent any further transactions.

So as you can appreciate...what is the next stage? What do you do in this instance?

TadleyBaggie

If they were truly online transactions, the PIN isn't used anyway. Or did they say the CVV (or CV2) number?

Caz3121

did he have the card in his presence when abroad or was it left behind?
There is some confusion here...online transactions do not require entering pin number so, if the bank are saying the pin was used then it was with a physical card. If the card was abroad with your friend then this indicates it could be a cloned card. Maybe get a police report and give details to bank,

grumbler

yellowplum wrote: »

he was informed that they where not fraudulent transactions and he entered his pin number,

The question arises if it was just PIN or chip&PIN. If the former, a cloned card could have been used.

So as you can appreciate...what is the next stage? What do you do in this instance?

I would stick to my guns and complain. Then, if necessary, I would take the case to the FOS.

eskbanker

yellowplum wrote: »

he was informed that they where not fraudulent transactions and he entered his pin number, bit difficult in mid air

Not at all, there are many airlines taking PIN-authorised card payments in mid air, either via cabin crew with mobile pinpads for buying food/drink/duty-free, etc (cheap airlines) or via seatback screens for internet/phone/movie access (full service airlines). Depending on airlines, routes, etc, such charges could very easily be posted to the card account from a completely different country from where your friend was actually flying.

Anyway, not suggesting that's actually what's happened here as I have no reason to suspect your friend is making anything up, just observing the art of the possible....

yellowplum

Thanks for the replies. I made him call up again and make sure the card was cancelled so it can't be used any more.

Some clarity was given on the transactions it seems they where all made in London while he was in Australia and flying home.

They have now cancelled and reissued a new card.

I made him call the ombudsman and lodge a complaint to get them to write to BOI

yellowplum

The card was in his presence at all times, I have asked him repeatedly if he used it and where he used it. It was used on a few occasions in Australia and once in Abu Dhabi on the return leg of the flight.

I also asked if he let it out of his sight when he used it.

grumbler

yellowplum wrote: »

... card has been used in his absence by someone/somehow.

yellowplum wrote: »

The card was in his presence at all times,...

Is it just me?

Ben8282

It may be easier to shed some light on what happened if we had some idea of the nature of the transactions. Is there indication of what they may actually be for? Do you recognise the name of the merchant? What sort of amounts are we talking about?
Rather than premature complaints to the ombudsman, your friend should raise a formal dispute with the credit card company and await the outcome,
You do say though, leaving aside the pin confusion, that they were online transactions made in London. Could they have been just that, something rebilling or something done by a member of his household in his absence?

pvt

yellowplum wrote: »

I also asked if he let it out of his sight when he used it.

And his answer was?

agrinnall

grumbler wrote: »

Is it just me?

I think so. I read it as the card was in the holder's possession at all times but the details were used while he was absent from the UK.