does Square invalidate credit card protection ?

PM2019

thank you. All the questions I want to ask myself, for this transaction and other future transactions...which may be larger and even more worrying.

born_again

Terry_Towelling wrote: »

Can any current Chargeback practitioners/Fraud operatives give any views on CNP liabilities where this number has been used?

What it is more likely to do is trigger a security check.

Makes no difference what so ever. Sitll have the fraud chargeback right.
Only thing that stops a fraud chargeback is using Verified by Visa. I guess mastercard secure is the same.
In my experience VbV is a total waste of time as far as stopping fraud goes.

PM2019

just on the 3 digit number not HAVING to be revealed but just something that is desirable, I have made many bookings for theatre, cinema, workshops etc over the last year or two and in every case, the 3 digit number has been requested. So, maybe I could refuse to give this number, as a customer protecting their data, and they'd have to accept my booking? Just curious. I will try that the next time. I am assuming that, somehow, if I book online and not by telephone....the data is encrypted so can't be read by an employee...or perhaps that is naive. It would be good to have all this clarified.

Terry_Towelling

PM2019 wrote: »

just on the 3 digit number not HAVING to be revealed but just something that is desirable, I have made many bookings for theatre, cinema, workshops etc over the last year or two and in every case, the number has been requested. So, maybe I could refuse to give this number, as a customer protecting their data, and they'd have to accept my booking? Just curious. I will try that the next time.

You'd probably find that the retailer's systems won't allow the transaction to proceed without it and your booking would be refused. If you decided to give an incorrect number, the transaction would fail to gain authorisation approval and would be declined.

Like I said it is a tool to help retailers better assess the risk of taking a CNP transaction. As confirmed by @born again, anyone using your card number and CVV2/CVC2 to commit fraud, might manage to do so, but you'd still be able to get your card issuer to raise a Chargeback if it did happen.

You have little or nothing to fear. I've been giving my number out for years and, touch wood, never had any fraud on any of my accounts.

PM2019

Thanks Terry. I suppose I am trying to avoid any situation where my data may be used inappropriately/ without my consent, so I don't have to go through the hassle of chargeback in the hope that justice will be done. . Maybe I should just say 'Hello' to the modern world and trust in the law/processes that all will be well....but that brings me back to my original question about does using Square invalidate claims on credit card transactions...I would never have believed it did but currently....that may not be the case.

born_again

PM2019 wrote: »

j So, maybe I could refuse to give this number, as a customer protecting their data, and they'd have to accept my booking? .

It is a piece of data that is designed to be used. Like your PIN. It just proves you have the card.

I would very much think, that if you refused to give the CVV, that a retailer would simply decline the transaction, or your card provider would. Especially if it is a online transaction.
Some retailers will allow payments without a CVV, but often these are over the phone as they have a chance to overrule the terminal. Which a online retailer won't be able to do as it is all automatic.

If it's asked for just give it. You are doing what is required.

Think of it like this. How long have you had your card and how many times have you given it out?
Then how many times have you had fraud?

boo_star

PM2019 wrote: »

Thanks Terry. I suppose I am trying to avoid any situation where my data may be used inappropriately/ without my consent, so I don't have to go through the hassle of chargeback in the hope that justice will be done. . Maybe I should just say 'Hello' to the modern world and trust in the law/processes that all will be well....but that brings me back to my original question about does using Square invalidate claims on credit card transactions...I would never have believed it did but currently....that may not be the case.

The only way to (maybe) avoid your data being used inappropriately is to not give it out at all.

You may find modern life to be a bit difficult if you're unwilling to give retailers etc your card number, expiry and start dates and the CVV number.

Just accept that fraud is always going to be possible and be a little less cautious.

Terry_Towelling

PM2019 wrote: »

....but that brings me back to my original question about does using Square invalidate claims on credit card transactions...I would never have believed it did but currently....that may not be the case.

At the moment I don't think this specific angle has actually been tested in the courts, so customers will be relying on their card issuers' interpretations of the situation - which could quite easily not accord with what a court of law might say. The courts have ruled (I believe) that where there are multiple 'parts' to the DCS chain, (e.g. Visa and MasterCard processing systems sitting between card issuer and merchant acquirer) that does not break said chain. Their thinking must be that all stages in the process are made according to pre-existing arrangements.

This principle should extend to your situation because all links in the chain are working according to arrangements that existed before the transaction was made - they are pre-existing arrangements.

I have a suspicion that MSE, Which? and FOS are all working under the presumption that the DCS chain is broken in your scenario but I also suspect they haven't drawn the distinction between situations where the consumer uses a payment service provider (like PayPal) and where the retailer does.

Unfortunately, I am just expressing opinions here and my opinions count for nothing (as some posters on this forum will be only too happy to confirm). Someone needs to take this sort of situation to court and get a ruling. Sometimes the threat of a consumer getting a ruling can be enough to change the views of their card company who would rather pay out a single claim (without prejudice) than see a ruling that would oblige them to pay out on every claim of this sort.

PM2019

All true, and thanks for putting things so clearly Terry Towell.. For myself in my current predicament, I can certainly prove 'per-existing arrangement' - and that gives me some heart. However, a ruling is required to safeguard us all on the 3/4th party issue because - at the moment - it is vague and that is unacceptable, especially if making a sizable purchase. And, in that, I also include retailers. I can see how the current ambiguous situation around claims has arisen due to the abuse of the system by fraudulent consumers It is a tough one, but in the meantime, I believe that we all need to be wary and not assume that credit cards automatically protect us.

PM2019

Thanks Boo Star. I believe in testing things to the limit and am not sure I will simply lie down and die and be less cautious...heheh.... it is possible to be over reasonable you know! And being over reasonable, never changed anything.....but I'm feeling certainly less anxious about my own situation since I started this thread, so thanks to everyone involved.