Non 'Contactless' credit cards are available! 24 July 2022 at 11:14AM in Credit cards 21 replies 1K views

TMSG

@400ixl Yeah, I do have a "Cards" menu entry (and had selected this before)... but this produces simply a screen saying "We can't find any cards." I have those two cards but for whatever reason they do not show up. Probably I could give FD a ring but their phone CS has become so horrible that I'm avoiding this as much as I can. In fact, I am seriously contemplating to leave them for good.

Perhaps a Challenger bank would be a better choice.

And thanks for trying to help.

400ixl

Yes, sounds like something is wrong as it is all in the app for me. Maybe just send them a message in the app if you would prefer that, they have been reasonably responsive that way for me in the past and its not something you need real time responses to.

Starling have the options as well, as do Chase as challenger banks. Neither do Credit cards though so you would need an option there if you don't keep that with FD.

born_again

Lets put it like this. The only contactless card fraud seen is on lost or stolen cards.
No fraudster is going to go to the trouble & expense of buying contactless card scanning software & loads of blank cards just for the amount they may make. Even with the increased limit of £100 there is not really anything they can buy that will return a fast cash return.

Been dealing with contactless since they came out & the % of fraud on them is far less than normal Card not present fraud, from compromised details.

I get some people do not like them. That is their choice. So banks should offer a choice to customers. But it was customers that wanted contactless cards in the focus groups.

RogerBareford

born_again said:

Lets put it like this. The only contactless card fraud seen is on lost or stolen cards.
No fraudster is going to go to the trouble & expense of buying contactless card scanning software & loads of blank cards just for the amount they may make. Even with the increased limit of £100 there is not really anything they can buy that will return a fast cash return.

Been dealing with contactless since they came out & the % of fraud on them is far less than normal Card not present fraud, from compromised details.

I get some people do not like them. That is their choice. So banks should offer a choice to customers. But it was customers that wanted contactless cards in the focus groups.

Well they wouldn't do that anyway as it's not possible to scan a contactless card and then make a copy of it that can be used to make purchases.

Like you said it only happens on lost or stolen cards and they would refund any fraudulent activity anyway so if your not careless with your cards their isn't any security concern.

Dandytf

400ixl said:

sairy.gamp said:

As many (but by no means all) will know, many banks will upon request issue the customer with a Debit card that does NOT have the insecure 'Contactless' payment function enabled (they DO keep increasing the spending limit dont they ). What is less well appreciated is that some issuers will now provide the customer with a CREDIT card that likewise is 'NON contactless'. This is very useful if losing your card (and all the subsequent cancellation hassle that creates) is a worry to you. Vanquis and Santander are two providers that will provide their customers with a non contactless CREDIT card upon request. No firm (to my knowledge) offers you an 'opt out of contactless' option during the application process - you have to contact them afterwards. 

Coming into the 21st century, most card issuers now have apps which allow you to turn off all of the different features individually giving you full control as and when you need it. No need for them to issue specific cards as its in your control anyway.

Usually you can switch on/off contactless, set the limit if on, control ATM, Online, In Person and importantly swiping features as well.

No need to limit yourself to a could of options when the world has moved on and what you want is generally available anyway.

Such features allow me to use Starling as Service/Mot card only.

maisie_cat

I'm with First Direct and have never had a contactless card. When they came out years ago I had security concerns and asked for the non contactless version. It's been replaced a few times and never with a contactless one.

oldagetraveller1

Since receiving my Tesco C.C. I thought it was non contactless and when using for non online payments always used the p.i.n..

That was until I only recently noticed the contactless symbol was on the back.

Just in case some pedant asks why I didn't see it when the card was signed, maybe I did but it didn't obviously register at the time.

Tarian

jbrassy said:

I don't understand the luddites which are anti-contactless. I recently had a fraudulent transaction appear on my Barclaycard where someone had spent over £1000 on flights with Aero Mexico. It is not possible that this transaction could have been initiated through a contactless payment because the amount is too high. You also hear about scammers using skimmers to collect data from contactless cards. However, not enough data is handed over from a contactless transaction to make online purchases. 

Therefore, someone must of obtained my card details when I used chip and pin (probably during my holiday in Mexico). You can avoid contactless if you like, but scammers are pretty smart and will always find a way. No payment method is 100% secure. Barclaycard ultimately refunded me the fraudulent transactions to the penny, and issued me a new card. It was minimal hassle. 

As has been previously mentioned, the best way you can prevent fraud is to use Google Pay or Apple Pay as these apps use tokenisation which I believe is the most secure way to pay. 

In sum:
1- stop spreading nonsense myths about contactless;
2 - just pick the best credit card for your needs;
3 - use Apple Pay or Google Pay where possible.

"Luddites" ?
There's no need to be rude....
...... just because you " don't understand" !

It really is very simple.
A) Contactless allows money to be taken without explicit consent - similar to opening one's wallet and saying "take whatever you want".
I dropped a contactless card - which was then used twice within 15 minutes.
(By all means consider me flawed !)

In a restaurant, a waiter took my (unwanted contactless) card off the table and waved it without asking my permission.

B ) You say "minimal" hassle - for sorting out a theft.
The supposed time savings with contactless are negligible (2 to 3 seconds per transaction#).
To address the theft (above) it took 2 calls, together around 25 minutes to deal it.
"minimal" hassle ???

# A bar I used to use has gone cashless. Payments in cash that used to take around 15-20 seconds now take at least 20 seconds - often longer when staff have to wait for one (of several) pay device to be released by a colleague - then cannot get a signal.

C) Why should the rest of us pay (all-be-it indirectly) to compensate for contactless loss ????
How many Insurance Cos would compensate in full for theft from an open car or house door ???
(And if they did, what would next year's Premium be ?)

D) Banks are inconsistent.
Merely for viewing an Account online, 3 steps are now required.
In the same login session, for an amendment to a Payee detail or Reference, many banks require a repeat of one (or more) security step(s)....
...yet they are happy for cards to be debited with zero security.
It makes no sense.


Now please tell which theme I have written is a "myth".

We "luddites" (sensibles) could suggest that fans of contactless are reckless (or worse).
But instead, all we ask for is CHOICE.

[Deleted User]

Tarian said:

jbrassy said:

I don't understand the luddites which are anti-contactless. I recently had a fraudulent transaction appear on my Barclaycard where someone had spent over £1000 on flights with Aero Mexico. It is not possible that this transaction could have been initiated through a contactless payment because the amount is too high. You also hear about scammers using skimmers to collect data from contactless cards. However, not enough data is handed over from a contactless transaction to make online purchases. 

Therefore, someone must of obtained my card details when I used chip and pin (probably during my holiday in Mexico). You can avoid contactless if you like, but scammers are pretty smart and will always find a way. No payment method is 100% secure. Barclaycard ultimately refunded me the fraudulent transactions to the penny, and issued me a new card. It was minimal hassle. 

As has been previously mentioned, the best way you can prevent fraud is to use Google Pay or Apple Pay as these apps use tokenisation which I believe is the most secure way to pay. 

In sum:
1- stop spreading nonsense myths about contactless;
2 - just pick the best credit card for your needs;
3 - use Apple Pay or Google Pay where possible.

"Luddites" ?
There's no need to be rude....
...... just because you " don't understand" !

It really is very simple.
A) Contactless allows money to be taken without explicit consent - similar to opening one's wallet and saying "take whatever you want".
I dropped a contactless card - which was then used twice within 15 minutes.
(By all means consider me flawed !)

In a restaurant, a waiter took my (unwanted contactless) card off the table and waved it without asking my permission.

B ) You say "minimal" hassle - for sorting out a theft.
The supposed time savings with contactless are negligible (2 to 3 seconds per transaction#).
To address the theft (above) it took 2 calls, together around 25 minutes to deal it.
"minimal" hassle ???

# A bar I used to use has gone cashless. Payments in cash that used to take around 15-20 seconds now take at least 20 seconds - often longer when staff have to wait for one (of several) pay device to be released by a colleague - then cannot get a signal.

C) Why should the rest of us pay (all-be-it indirectly) to compensate for contactless loss ????
How many Insurance Cos would compensate in full for theft from an open car or house door ???
(And if they did, what would next year's Premium be ?)

D) Banks are inconsistent.
Merely for viewing an Account online, 3 steps are now required.
In the same login session, for an amendment to a Payee detail or Reference, many banks require a repeat of one (or more) security step(s)....
...yet they are happy for cards to be debited with zero security.
It makes no sense.


Now please tell which theme I have written is a "myth".

We "luddites" (sensibles) could suggest that fans of contactless are reckless (or worse).
But instead, all we ask for is CHOICE.

A) is a myth - someone could take your dropped wallet and all your cash and you won't get that back. With contactless theft you will. The waiter doing that is a restaurant issue, not the card issue, why leave it on the table if you didn't want them to pick it up? Even if you have a non-contactless card, a thief can use the card number/expiry date etc to steal by ordering online.

B ) is definitely a myth, paying cash requires you to get change, paying by PIN requires you to insert the card, wait for it to wake up, enter the PIN, wait for it to process, remove card and put it away. Not 2-3 seconds. A contactless card or phone, you just wave and go. Same principle with say the tube, buy a ticket and use by hard, carry around an oyster and keep topping up or just use card. The bar example is flat wrong in my experience, till staff waiting to use a terminal is no different (and still quicker) than staff waiting to get access to a till to put away cash or the card receipt

C) You pay indirectly for people who transfer money in scams and the bank has to refund. You pay indirectly for people who aren't responsible borrowers and end up writing off debt. I pay indirectly for the bank to have to print two types of card to keep people like you happy. That is how finance works, it runs for the majority not the minority. Your insurance example is poor, leaving a car door open is not the same as a stolen card, it goes back to A) - the bank doesn't compensate you for you losing your wallet and your cash but, provided you were observing sensible precautions (like not leaving your card unattended) you will be compensated for the card thefts. 

D) Your online example makes perfect sense access to an account gives a thief all manner of control, taking out funds, cancelling things etc. A card has a limit (which many lenders let you set) and can be blocked in a second using an app

All are myths, I wouldn't call you Luddites but you're certainly not a "sensibles"[sic]

You can turn off contactless on cards on many banks anyway

RogerBareford

Tarian said:

jbrassy said:

I don't understand the luddites which are anti-contactless. I recently had a fraudulent transaction appear on my Barclaycard where someone had spent over £1000 on flights with Aero Mexico. It is not possible that this transaction could have been initiated through a contactless payment because the amount is too high. You also hear about scammers using skimmers to collect data from contactless cards. However, not enough data is handed over from a contactless transaction to make online purchases. 

Therefore, someone must of obtained my card details when I used chip and pin (probably during my holiday in Mexico). You can avoid contactless if you like, but scammers are pretty smart and will always find a way. No payment method is 100% secure. Barclaycard ultimately refunded me the fraudulent transactions to the penny, and issued me a new card. It was minimal hassle. 

As has been previously mentioned, the best way you can prevent fraud is to use Google Pay or Apple Pay as these apps use tokenisation which I believe is the most secure way to pay. 

In sum:
1- stop spreading nonsense myths about contactless;
2 - just pick the best credit card for your needs;
3 - use Apple Pay or Google Pay where possible.

"Luddites" ?
There's no need to be rude....
...... just because you " don't understand" !

It really is very simple.
A) Contactless allows money to be taken without explicit consent - similar to opening one's wallet and saying "take whatever you want".
I dropped a contactless card - which was then used twice within 15 minutes.
(By all means consider me flawed !)

In a restaurant, a waiter took my (unwanted contactless) card off the table and waved it without asking my permission.

I'm probably pointing out the obvious here but if your prone to dropping things then you could just have easily dropped cash and would have never got it back. Plus people who look after their cards won't have any issues.

The waiter shouldn't have taken your card and that's not a fault of contactless.

B ) You say "minimal" hassle - for sorting out a theft.
The supposed time savings with contactless are negligible (2 to 3 seconds per transaction#).
To address the theft (above) it took 2 calls, together around 25 minutes to deal it.
"minimal" hassle ???

# A bar I used to use has gone cashless. Payments in cash that used to take around 15-20 seconds now take at least 20 seconds - often longer when staff have to wait for one (of several) pay device to be released by a colleague - then cannot get a signal.

Well if you look after your card you won't need to spend time calling up the bank.

The example of that bar is a good example of contactless being run poorly. They should have enough devices for all the staff to have one each and there should be no signal issues in a fixed location.

C) Why should the rest of us pay (all-be-it indirectly) to compensate for contactless loss ????
How many Insurance Cos would compensate in full for theft from an open car or house door ???
(And if they did, what would next year's Premium be ?)

D) Banks are inconsistent.
Merely for viewing an Account online, 3 steps are now required.
In the same login session, for an amendment to a Payee detail or Reference, many banks require a repeat of one (or more) security step(s)....
...yet they are happy for cards to be debited with zero security.
It makes no sense.

We don't pay indirectly for contactless because the banks have determined that the increased revenue generated by the use of contactless (due to an increase in card payments) is far greater than the money lost in fraud. That's why they support it and are happy with it.

The amount of contactless fraud is extremely low. If someone steals a card they can still use if for online payments without contactless and the fraud from that is far far higher.

Now please tell which theme I have written is a "myth".

We "luddites" (sensibles) could suggest that fans of contactless are reckless (or worse).
But instead, all we ask for is CHOICE.

But why does there need to be a choice? Do you also want the choice of your card having no numbers on it to prevent online fraud aswell if it's lost?

The risk is so low and you just need to look after your card better.