I want to disable contactless payments on my credit card

Please note this sub-forum does not provide professional finance advice. You should seek advice from a licensed financial advisor.

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification.

If investing please consider our affiliate link for new accounts: Sharesies.

Forums › Finance and wealth management › I want to disable contactless payments on my credit card - Paypass or Paywave

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#525072 23-Sep-2011 15:35

StarBlazer: I agree with the OP on this. My concern is loss/theft of my wallet. In the hours it takes for you to become aware that you no longer have your credit card, how many tap n' go transactions under $80 could be performed? Sure shops will have CCTV, but the chances are the perps will be out of area on a spending spree. Even then we presume the police have the time to follow up on these grainy pixelated images. It doesn't have to be high value items, just something that could be offloaded easily through TradeMe or Cash Converters.

How does this differ to the past ~20 years where somebody could simply walk into a store, buy groceries, and sign your signature because it's on the back of your card?

How does it differ to somebody using your card online to buy goods or services where no other details are required apart from your credit card number?

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#525074 23-Sep-2011 15:37

StarBlazer:I'll bet you all the tea in China that they won't offer tap 'n' go on the ATM's - too much risk!!! (you'll probably tell me they already do in America).

In America you don't need to sign or enter a PIN in most stores for low value purchases (the limit varies between merchants). Simply swipe your card and the transaction is complete, much like NFC.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#525087 23-Sep-2011 15:57

sbiddle:
StarBlazer: I agree with the OP on this. My concern is loss/theft of my wallet. In the hours it takes for you to become aware that you no longer have your credit card, how many tap n' go transactions under $80 could be performed? Sure shops will have CCTV, but the chances are the perps will be out of area on a spending spree. Even then we presume the police have the time to follow up on these grainy pixelated images. It doesn't have to be high value items, just something that could be offloaded easily through TradeMe or Cash Converters.

How does this differ to the past ~20 years where somebody could simply walk into a store, buy groceries, and sign your signature because it's on the back of your card?

How does it differ to somebody using your card online to buy goods or services where no other details are required apart from your credit card number?

Because when signature was the only way to prove it was your card, it was scrutinised more - there wasn't as many cards on the scene and the staff tended to be better trained (I include myself having worked in various retail sectors). The buyer had to at least be able to reasonably write the signature. If the cashier was unsure they were able to challenge the signature and ask for ID or get a second opinion from the manager - genuine customers didn't mind this. I'm not saying it was perfect but there is some interaction between seller and buyer and it required more effort on the part of the criminal than just tapping a piece of plastic on a machine.

Online purchases are different again - and it requires more than just your number - you need the expiry date and the verification number (the latter of which is not stored on the magnetic strip). The goods usually have to be sent somewhere and are usually sent the next day which is after the CC transactions have been authorised and cleared by the clearing house.

Again not perfect but is no way near the same as having your wallet pick pocketed and a large number of small purchases made in a very short period of time where the goods have been handed over without any challenge. Yes the banks have anti fraud algorithms, but the first time the thief is challenged they sheepishly made a retreat or in some of the cases I had - they ran!

Procrastination eventually pays off.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#525088 23-Sep-2011 15:59

sbiddle:
StarBlazer:I'll bet you all the tea in China that they won't offer tap 'n' go on the ATM's - too much risk!!! (you'll probably tell me they already do in America).

In America you don't need to sign or enter a PIN in most stores for low value purchases (the limit varies between merchants). Simply swipe your card and the transaction is complete, much like NFC.

Wow - didn't know this. Probably why they are more at home with the NFC idea.

Banks in England started putting your photo on the back of the card - not a bad idea

TAP - SHOW 'n' GO (you heard it here first!).

Procrastination eventually pays off.

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#525104 23-Sep-2011 16:29

StarBlazer:
In the past, banks made you liable for the spending up to the point where you reported the card as lost/stolen. It wouldn't take even a stupid criminal long to run up quite a bill and you would be left holding the debt until you were somehow able to prove that it wasn't you making the purchases. In the meantime you could be left with no cards and no money to buy even food (cue melodramatic swoon).

I suggest that you change banks if that is how your bank treats you.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#525108 23-Sep-2011 16:39

John2010:
StarBlazer:
In the past, banks made you liable for the spending up to the point where you reported the card as lost/stolen. It wouldn't take even a stupid criminal long to run up quite a bill and you would be left holding the debt until you were somehow able to prove that it wasn't you making the purchases. In the meantime you could be left with no cards and no money to buy even food (cue melodramatic swoon).

I suggest that you change banks if that is how your bank treats you.

I did say "in the past" - not sure of what the T&Cs are for Westpac, although Mastercard do talk about a zero fraud liability.

Procrastination eventually pays off.

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek

#525122 23-Sep-2011 17:23

StarBlazer: e....(edit)....Because when signature was the only way to prove it was your card, it was scrutinised more - ...(edit)...

Is this a Tui Ad? (yeah right)
Signature verification has never been very well managed at the counter.

For a number of years I've had 'Photo ID Required' printed in the signature area on my cards, and only this year started using a pin. I get asked for photo ID less than 5% of the time. Most counter staff either can't read or are so confused they are embarrassed to ask.

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#525133 23-Sep-2011 17:47

StarBlazer:
sbiddle:
StarBlazer:I'll bet you all the tea in China that they won't offer tap 'n' go on the ATM's - too much risk!!! (you'll probably tell me they already do in America).

In America you don't need to sign or enter a PIN in most stores for low value purchases (the limit varies between merchants). Simply swipe your card and the transaction is complete, much like NFC.

Wow - didn't know this. Probably why they are more at home with the NFC idea.

Banks in England started putting your photo on the back of the card - not a bad idea

TAP - SHOW 'n' GO (you heard it here first!).

You could get your photo on ANZ credit cards up until around 2 years ago when Mastercard internationally scrapped the concept because they saw no value in it.

One thing people have to remember with banks is that everything is carefully managed risk.

PenultimateHop

637 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#525475 25-Sep-2011 03:12

oxnsox: For a number of years I've had 'Photo ID Required' printed in the signature area on my cards, and only this year started using a pin. I get asked for photo ID less than 5% of the time. Most counter staff either can't read or are so confused they are embarrassed to ask.

Actually merchants aren't permitted to ask for additional ID even if you write that on the signature area. They're required to ask you to sign the card properly (or sign the receipt with "See ID" or whatever). Visa and MasterCard have repeatedly told people not to do this. http://usa.visa.com/merchants/risk_management/card_present.html as an example.

Not sure about the fear/paranoia: every credit card I've had has either a ceiling of $50 of liability (assuming you actually report the card missing in a reasonable timeframe) or $0 ceiling. I have a couple of cards that have NFC functionality and I don't even remember using it, much less being defrauded by it. The only card fraud I've had in recent years has been a merchant mistake, rather than anything malicious -- and I really, really, live off my cards ($20K/mo spend is entirely typical), using them in 100+ cities a year. You would think I'd be more prone to fraud if it was such a big issue, wouldn't you?

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#525482 25-Sep-2011 08:01

I should add a comment here that I added on David's original blog post.

Australia is now several years ahead of NZ in terms of NFC deployment with the mast majority of Mastercard's in Austraia NFC capable. That means over 6 million+ cards and now 50000+ NFC terminals. Usage has now become an every day occurance for many people.

My understanding after discussing this a few weeks ago is that there has been absolutely no increase in credit card fraud levels as a result of the NFC rollout. This could be somebody spinning me lies (which I doubt), but I suspect it's actually a case of new technology including the launch of chip & PIN over in recent years there actually reducing risk and preventing many large scale fraudulant "signature only" purchases.

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek

#525644 25-Sep-2011 21:42

PenultimateHop:
Actually merchants aren't permitted to ask for additional ID even if you write that on the signature area. They're required to ask you to sign the card properly (or sign the receipt with "See ID" or whatever). Visa and MasterCard have repeatedly told people not to do this.

Oddly enough t was Mastercard who recommended me to do this some years ago after my card number was used fraudulently.

My view is that a signature does not verify my identity. Anyone can copy a signature, but who is going to want to copy your face? In reality a PIN is not much more secure than a signature.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79263 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#525645 25-Sep-2011 21:49

StarBlazer:
sbiddle: In America you don't need to sign or enter a PIN in most stores for low value purchases (the limit varies between merchants). Simply swipe your card and the transaction is complete, much like NFC.

Wow - didn't know this. Probably why they are more at home with the NFC idea.

In the US some places will ask you for a photo ID and signature (Las Vegas for example) but in other places (most of the places I shopped in CA and WA) if the purchase is of low value you only have to swipe your card and off you go...

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79263 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#525647 25-Sep-2011 21:52

oxnsox: For a number of years I've had 'Photo ID Required' printed in the signature area on my cards, and only this year started using a pin. I get asked for photo ID less than 5% of the time. Most counter staff either can't read or are so confused they are embarrassed to ask.

A card should be signed. If it's not signed the merchant should not process the card/sale. "See ID" or equivalent is not a signature.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#525687 26-Sep-2011 09:09

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating a return to signature - I was just commenting that 15 years ago when signature was the only verification it was drilled into you (where I worked). If a fraudulent transaction came back you would get a roasting.

Chip and pin was a great addition at the time - the chips are encrypted to stop you copying the card, but crims are quick to adapt to new technology. In the UK there were a number of reports of finding makeshift CCTV above/around ATMs and terminals - then they would have your PIN all they needed to do was steal your card.

The concern (probably allayed by sbiddle) was that tap n go meant no planning or additional work of a pick pocket - they'd steal your wallet and tap out a number of purchases before you realised it was missing. If there has been no increase in fraud - that's great. If there is no liability on my part that's even better. Like you say - it's all about balanced risk

Procrastination eventually pays off.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#525688 26-Sep-2011 09:19

I have a colleague who has a teenage lad who is a bit of trouble. He's been known to empty the parent's wallet/purse of cash - even taking their Snapper card to buy from the dairy for his "mates". Imagine if they had tap n go cards - no PIN required. The banks would say it's a domestic issue and they would be fully liable.

I'm not saying individual cases like this should halt technological advances, but convenience/speed is not everything.

Personally I would prefer to see a challenge step in the process continue - photo on the back of the card would not be difficult to re-introduce. If the shopkeepers can't be bothered to check the photo, then they should be liable for the losses.

Procrastination eventually pays off.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9