Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • harttss3
    • By harttss3 21st May 19, 10:14 AM
    • 15Posts
    • 4Thanks
    harttss3
    Contactless cards
    • #1
    • 21st May 19, 10:14 AM
    Contactless cards 21st May 19 at 10:14 AM
    I think it would be a great idea if banks would allow you to set an alarm cap on spending via contactless, say perhaps 3 contactless transactions in one hour trigger a need to enter a pin. This would be particularly useful if you lost or had your card stolen and didn't immediately know. 30 transactions can soon empty your account. My bank, Nationwide, have told me this is not something they would consider.
Page 2
    • 20SmthngSver
    • By 20SmthngSver 22nd May 19, 2:12 PM
    • 239 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    20SmthngSver
    This is totally correct.

    The magstripe on the back of your card and the numbers printed on it each individually give you more fraud exposure than contactless does. The scaremongering about contactless is just that.
    Originally posted by JuicyJesus
    This is not actually true. Read this link about how at the point of a Contactless card or mobile device touching a reader, it can be intercepted by someone nearby and they can remotely steal the info of the card and then use it to buy online. The link shows how Which? managed to do this and buy a 3000 TV online. A bit like how you don't know if a skimmer is in an ATM, you don't know if card readers are fitted or tampered with remote stealing devices. If this remote stealing happens, you'd actually not be aware of it either. It's concealed and you wouldn't know how your details had been obtained.

    It's a simple fact that Conactless cards directly opens you up to multiple traudulent transactions if stolen or lost. I know you get money back, but either way, you'd still have to sort it all out and get replacements. Card clash is another issue. You'd still have to remove the card from a wallet to ensure other cards aren't charged.

    The other issue is Contactless taking the payment more than once. I know of people saying that the shop for example took a payment twice, and it had to be refunded from head office. only issue that it was refunded twice too, so the shop lost money.

    It's not just to pass it off as scaremongering. If people have genuine concerns, then it's legimate for them to air them on this forum.

    https://www.which.co.uk/money/banking/banking-security-and-new-ways-to-pay/new-ways-to-pay/contactless-cards-ah1q15s797hb
    .....
    Home Deposit Savings: 38,650
    Pension: 11,700
    ..
    • 20SmthngSver
    • By 20SmthngSver 22nd May 19, 2:15 PM
    • 239 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    20SmthngSver
    I have requested and received none contactless versions of my NatWest and Barclays debit cards

    I have also scratched the CVV numbers off the back of them, partially because they then cannot be used online if lost but also because they then cannot be used to reset Internet banking logon details
    Originally posted by 18cc
    Hi. I know Barclaycard and NatWest credit cards are not enabled for opt-out, but Barclays and NatWest debit cards are. Just go in branch and ask and they will do it in front of you. You might be met with resistance, but they can't refuse.
    .....
    Home Deposit Savings: 38,650
    Pension: 11,700
    ..
    • Ergates
    • By Ergates 22nd May 19, 7:44 PM
    • 476 Posts
    • 669 Thanks
    Ergates
    This is not actually true. Read this link about how at the point of a Contactless card or mobile device touching a reader, it can be intercepted by someone nearby
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    From the article you refer to:

    "Someone would probably have to be uncomfortably close to you to lift your card details without you knowing - in our tests, the card had to be touched against the mobile card reading device."

    So no, they can't be "intercepted by someone nearby", the maximum "range" of a contactless card is about 4 cm. Scaremongering.


    A bit like how you don't know if a skimmer is in an ATM, you don't know if card readers are fitted or tampered with remote stealing devices.
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    If the card reader has been tampered with to steal details, it wouldn't matter what method you used to pay - it could still steal your details. In fact, it would be worse if you used chip and pin because it's a lot harder to claim back fraudulent payments if the fraudster uses your PIN.


    It's a simple fact that Conactless cards directly opens you up to multiple traudulent transactions if stolen or lost.
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    Except, in the real world, this doesn't happen. Your fears are not reflected by reality.


    Card clash is another issue. You'd still have to remove the card from a wallet to ensure other cards aren't charged.
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    What? How on earth is that an *issue*? Name one other payment method you can use without taking it out of your wallet.

    The other issue is Contactless taking the payment more than once.
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    Nonsense, contactless payment systems can't just accidentally take payment twice. A payment can be processed twice (e.g. if the first attempt appears to be rejected by isn't), but this can happen with any payment method.

    If people have genuine concerns, then it's legimate for them to air them on this forum.
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    Just because people have concerns, doesn't mean they are legitimate or well founded. Baseless scaremongering is baseless scaremongering.
    • JuicyJesus
    • By JuicyJesus 22nd May 19, 10:26 PM
    • 3,550 Posts
    • 4,059 Thanks
    JuicyJesus
    What Ergates said. Lots of b*llocks is spread about contactless and that was a good takedown of it.
    urs sinserly,
    ~~joosy jeezus~~
    • 20SmthngSver
    • By 20SmthngSver 23rd May 19, 9:06 AM
    • 239 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    20SmthngSver
    From the article you refer to:

    "Someone would probably have to be uncomfortably close to you to lift your card details without you knowing - in our tests, the card had to be touched against the mobile card reading device."

    So no, they can't be "intercepted by someone nearby", the maximum "range" of a contactless card is about 4 cm. Scaremongering.



    If the card reader has been tampered with to steal details, it wouldn't matter what method you used to pay - it could still steal your details. In fact, it would be worse if you used chip and pin because it's a lot harder to claim back fraudulent payments if the fraudster uses your PIN.



    Except, in the real world, this doesn't happen. Your fears are not reflected by reality.



    What? How on earth is that an *issue*? Name one other payment method you can use without taking it out of your wallet.


    Nonsense, contactless payment systems can't just accidentally take payment twice. A payment can be processed twice (e.g. if the first attempt appears to be rejected by isn't), but this can happen with any payment method.


    Just because people have concerns, doesn't mean they are legitimate or well founded. Baseless scaremongering is baseless scaremongering.
    Originally posted by Ergates
    If people have concerns, they are completely legitimate! You have no right to say otherwise, especially without finding out why they have concerns. You can say "nonsense," but I do know of payment being taken twice. You don't have any authority or basis to say otherwise unless you're outright calling me and the other person liars.

    I don't have Contactless cards, so I don't take my Oyster card out of my wallet to tap it. If you do, you'd have to remove the specific card you want to use to avoid clashing. Before Contactless bank cards people just used to tap their wallet or purse. Not an issue, I'm just saying. Technology is advancing all the time, people will always find ways to intercept a payment. It's the digital world we live in.

    Anyway, you can dismiss everything as much as you like. You can have your opinion, but you're not really accepting of others opinions or concerns here and it's coming across aggressive instead of informative or corrective or reassuring. You're kind of twisting what I'm saying to suit you as well, so I don't see the point in continuing here.
    Last edited by 20SmthngSver; 23-05-2019 at 10:09 AM.
    .....
    Home Deposit Savings: 38,650
    Pension: 11,700
    ..
    • 18cc
    • By 18cc 23rd May 19, 11:03 AM
    • 1,559 Posts
    • 1,133 Thanks
    18cc
    I have some sympathy with the above post. It is a matter of personal preference if to have contactless, and is no less a valid choice than having it.

    All my cards are non-contactless except for those that don't allow the option (eg Barclaycard). 90% of my spending is done on Barclaycard and I use contactless extensively. My other cards I use infrequently and am quite happy to put the PIN in when I need to use them.

    In any case, according to Actionfraud contactless card fraud is surging and reacued 1.8 million in 2018. That is a lot of 30 spends...

    https://www.paymentscardsandmobile.com/contactless-card-fraud-surges-in-2018/
    • eskbanker
    • By eskbanker 23rd May 19, 11:45 AM
    • 10,662 Posts
    • 13,066 Thanks
    eskbanker
    according to Actionfraud contactless card fraud is surging and reacued 1.8 million in 2018. That is a lot of 30 spends...
    Originally posted by 18cc
    'Surging' is an unnecessarily emotive term but could obviously be applied to the use of contactless as well as the abuse.

    As ever, statistics can be cited and interpreted in different ways to support contrasting positions - 1.8m is actually only 60,000 30 spends, i.e. about one for every 1,000 of the UK population, although the article refers to "Average losses investigated by detectives were between 90 and 652 but the largest single contactless card fraud case reached 400,000, stemming from multiple purchases", so the number of fraud cases will obviously be much lower than 60,000 and will presumably be closer to 10-20,000.

    Likewise, the last line states "However, it should be made clear that, according to the latest UK fraud figures the actual proportion of all card fraud losses by value that were through contactless fraud was 3% in the first half of 2018".
    • Emily Joy
    • By Emily Joy 23rd May 19, 11:56 AM
    • 409 Posts
    • 187 Thanks
    Emily Joy
    I have now linked my card onto my phone. If I lose my phone, needs my thumb print to activate the card
    Originally posted by suki1964
    With all due respect, your phone screen is most likely to be full of your thumb prints and there is very little difficulty in acquiring them from there. (Especially if the phone is of any value, so can be sold once unlocked and cleared.) So it does sound secure, but in fact it is not.
    • Chino
    • By Chino 23rd May 19, 1:40 PM
    • 968 Posts
    • 641 Thanks
    Chino
    In any case, according to Actionfraud contactless card fraud is surging and reacued 1.8 million in 2018. That is a lot of 30 spends...
    Originally posted by 18cc
    Perhaps, but there were still only 2,739 reports of contactless card fraud in 2018 for 7.4 billion contactless transactions.
    • 18cc
    • By 18cc 23rd May 19, 1:51 PM
    • 1,559 Posts
    • 1,133 Thanks
    18cc
    Yes, absolutely agree contactless fraud is a very low percentage of the total. Not in itself a reason to not use contactless. However, if your wallet is full of contactless cards and you worry about the hassle should your lose it then you could consider making some of them non contactless.

    It's an emotional thing as much as anythingvelse...
    • Ergates
    • By Ergates 24th May 19, 11:36 AM
    • 476 Posts
    • 669 Thanks
    Ergates
    With all due respect, your phone screen is most likely to be full of your thumb prints and there is very little difficulty in acquiring them from there. (Especially if the phone is of any value, so can be sold once unlocked and cleared.) So it does sound secure, but in fact it is not.
    Originally posted by Emily Joy
    If MI5 or the CIA steal your phone, then this might be the case. Your average pick-pickpocket/bag snatcher doesn't have the capability to replicate someones fingerprint after lifting it from their phone screen.

    Anyone who *does* have that capability isn't really going to be interested in stealing a few quid with contactless payments.
    • Ergates
    • By Ergates 24th May 19, 11:53 AM
    • 476 Posts
    • 669 Thanks
    Ergates
    If people have concerns, they are completely legitimate!
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    Merely having a concern doesn't make it legitimate.
    If someone has a concern the fluoridation of tap water is a government mind control conspiracy, then their concerns are not legitimate.
    Your concerns might be *real* - in that it's true that you hold them - but that doesn't make them legitimate.

    You have no right to say otherwise
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    I have every right to say otherwise.

    Anyway, you can dismiss everything as much as you like. You can have your opinion, but you're not really accepting of others opinions or concerns here and it's coming across aggressive instead of informative or corrective or reassuring. You're kind of twisting what I'm saying to suit you as well, so I don't see the point in continuing here.
    Originally posted by 20SmthngSver
    I point by point highlighted why your concerns about contactless cards were unfounded. This is the very definition of informative and corrective. If you don't like the tone I used then that's your problem - you're an adult, you shouldn't need someone to speak to you like a child. I have little patience for people who hold onto non-rational beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
    • Ergates
    • By Ergates 24th May 19, 12:23 PM
    • 476 Posts
    • 669 Thanks
    Ergates
    Perhaps, but there were still only 2,739 reports of contactless card fraud in 2018 for 7.4 billion contactless transactions.
    Originally posted by Chino
    7.4 Billion transactions totalling 69 billion. Which makes fraudulent transactions 0.002% of all contactless transactions.
    • Emily Joy
    • By Emily Joy 24th May 19, 6:00 PM
    • 409 Posts
    • 187 Thanks
    Emily Joy
    If MI5 or the CIA steal your phone, then this might be the case. Your average pick-pickpocket/bag snatcher doesn't have the capability to replicate someones fingerprint after lifting it from their phone screen.

    Anyone who *does* have that capability isn't really going to be interested in stealing a few quid with contactless payments.
    Originally posted by Ergates
    I have a summer camp for secondary school students coming up. I am now thinking we should do it there just for fun.
    • Terry Towelling
    • By Terry Towelling 24th May 19, 6:59 PM
    • 1,620 Posts
    • 1,349 Thanks
    Terry Towelling
    Perhaps, but there were still only 2,739 reports of contactless card fraud in 2018 for 7.4 billion contactless transactions.
    Originally posted by Chino
    Can you tell us where your figures for the reports of contactless fraud have come from?

    Can you also confirm that the number 2739 relates to total fraudulent transactions rather than the number of cards affected by contactless fraud?

    Are you able to say whether the fraud reporting you refer to is complete and that all those reporting figures are compliant with the requirement to report?

    Can you confirm that there are no overlaps in the reporting such as an institution being able to report something as simply Lost & Stolen (L&S) fraud rather than specifically contactless fraud?

    Do you have any data on the drop in L&S fraud post CHIP & PIN and its subsequent increase after contactless was introduced?

    Thank you.
    • Terry Towelling
    • By Terry Towelling 24th May 19, 7:39 PM
    • 1,620 Posts
    • 1,349 Thanks
    Terry Towelling
    With all due respect, your phone screen is most likely to be full of your thumb prints and there is very little difficulty in acquiring them from there. (Especially if the phone is of any value, so can be sold once unlocked and cleared.) So it does sound secure, but in fact it is not.
    Originally posted by Emily Joy
    I have a suspicion (of old when the bank I worked for looked at thumbprint use) that certain detectors also detect the flow of blood under the skin. That rules out cutting off someone's thumb to use but I don't know if sticking a thumb print over your own thumb would work.

    Far more likely is the prospect of being drugged in a bar and being driven to a remote location and having your thumb tapped on the screen by a criminal whilst you are 'out of it' - as does indeed happen.
    • Emily Joy
    • By Emily Joy 24th May 19, 8:35 PM
    • 409 Posts
    • 187 Thanks
    Emily Joy
    I have a suspicion (of old when the bank I worked for looked at thumbprint use) that certain detectors also detect the flow of blood under the skin.
    Originally posted by Terry Towelling
    That's correct.
    I don't know if sticking a thumb print over your own thumb would work.
    Originally posted by Terry Towelling
    It does work with the fingerprint scanners used by iPhone.
    Far more likely is the prospect of being drugged in a bar and being driven to a remote location and having your thumb tapped on the screen by a criminal whilst you are 'out of it' - as does indeed happen.
    Originally posted by Terry Towelling
    Rather someone on a bike/motorbike will snatch the phone out of your hand...
    • Terry Towelling
    • By Terry Towelling 24th May 19, 9:06 PM
    • 1,620 Posts
    • 1,349 Thanks
    Terry Towelling
    Rather someone on a bike/motorbike will snatch the phone out of your hand...
    Originally posted by Emily Joy

    A few lessons for us all there - don't use biometrics, use a PIN instead; don't use your phone in the street; never trust a cyclist.
    • Emily Joy
    • By Emily Joy 24th May 19, 9:24 PM
    • 409 Posts
    • 187 Thanks
    Emily Joy
    A few lessons for us all there - don't use biometrics, use a PIN instead; don't use your phone in the street; never trust a cyclist.
    Originally posted by Terry Towelling
    ... and above all, try not to check your email/facebook/whatsapp while waiting on a traffic light in (East) London!
    • eskbanker
    • By eskbanker 24th May 19, 11:27 PM
    • 10,662 Posts
    • 13,066 Thanks
    eskbanker
    Can you tell us where your figures for the reports of contactless fraud have come from?

    Can you also confirm that the number 2739 relates to total fraudulent transactions rather than the number of cards affected by contactless fraud?

    Are you able to say whether the fraud reporting you refer to is complete and that all those reporting figures are compliant with the requirement to report?

    Can you confirm that there are no overlaps in the reporting such as an institution being able to report something as simply Lost & Stolen (L&S) fraud rather than specifically contactless fraud?

    Do you have any data on the drop in L&S fraud post CHIP & PIN and its subsequent increase after contactless was introduced?

    Thank you.
    Originally posted by Terry Towelling
    I'm assuming that Chino is simply relaying the figures mentioned in the article quoted by the poster they were responding to at post #26 above:
    Action Fraud, the national reporting centre for fraud and cybercrime, said that in 10 months last year there were 2,739 reports of contactless card fraud, totalling almost 1.8 million
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

194Posts Today

1,961Users online

Martin's Twitter