Cardholder liability for fraud

CopperPlate_2

Read this article on the Daily Mail website (it appears that it's true... ) regarding the liability of credit/debit cardholders for fraud.

The examples it gives relate to instances where cardholders are defrauded, for example, of £1000 and the CC provider states that it was due to the holders negligence that the fraud took place and that, yes, thank you very much, you ARE liable for the entire amount. The article goes on to quote the Consumer Credit Act which states that card holders will not be liable for anything more than £50 REGARDLESS of whether they are negligent or not. The Act overrides the providers T&C's which normally go on about holders being liable for full amounts, etc, etc.

The whole thing has come about following new guidance being issued by the Financial Services Ombudsman to card providers.

The link is here if anyone wants to have a look
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and-loans/article.html?in_article_id=401706&in_page_id=9

It also applies to debit cards but only where the fraud has caused the holder to become overdrawn.

Thought it might be interesting for anyone who's had a nasty experience with a fraudster/or bank even to make some further enquiry.

CP

Reaper

Thanks for the info. I had always thought the customer was liable if there had been gross negligence. To be honest I think they ought to be. It means indirectly all customers have to pay to compensate those who write their PIN numbers on their cards or worse.

It sure makes a nonsense of all these insurance policies offering cover for credit card fraud.

CopperPlate_2

Me too. In my work I come across people who are victims of fraud and who've been left high and dry by banks, etc because, for instance, it's a member of their immediate family who has committed the theft and knows where to look for the PIN, or practised the signature. As you say, it makes a mockery of the insurance policies and 'fraud guarantees' being trumpeted by financial providers at the moment.

CP