Forum Moderators: buckworks
The banks have to be your first port of call who will then decide if your case is strong enough to be passed to the police, who I suspect will then reject all but the strongest of cases. Resulting in very few prosecutions, not result more card fraud.
So in effect its open season in the UK for credit card fraudsters, baton down the hatches.
It would be nice if it was the cardholder who was given the decision about whether they wish to file a police complaint and press charges.
As a consumer there's very little you can do. As long as the pathetic police are more interested in soft targets it's in the consumer's interest to let the CC company be responsible for chasing and recovering stolen money.
I know of cases where the police havnt been interested in cases of assault, 'we are really just an emergency service' was their input.
Theres something deeply worrying about this trend
Its not the point, fraud is fraud and crime is crime.
To this day, the ring is still operating after 2 years, and our calls to the Mounties now go completely unanswered.
Thankfully, we have been able to identify these transactions and remove them from our ordering system. When in doubt call the credit card company.
Cheers.
if there is a genuine fraud, it's the merchant's responsibility to spot it, cancel the transaction etc - nobody loses, no need to whinge and call the police, no need to waste taxpayers money (i'm a taxpayer so i'm one of those paying for police time wasted by incompetent merchants)
all in all, it's no different really to saying "NO" to counterfeit money
Recently, one of my credit cards was used fradulently. By alerting the CC company I was able to confirm it was NOT my doing. The CC company is due to send a "form" for completion and return detailing how and when used, and confirming it was not our use at the time the fraud was committed.
The theif person used the card to top up their PAYG mobile phone account. How daft is that as it should be so easy to trace them!
They tried again a second time, but was declined.
When asked, I was told that the bank would gather the evidence and pass it to the police for action. I shall be monitoring this.
How they got hold of the cc number (not the card) is still a mystery. The only possibility is that they picked up the number from a transaction made somewhere, sometime.
Still waiting the forms, although issued with new CC numbers has happened swiftly and efficiently.
It seems to me that one thing we can all do it to obtain new CC numbers every so often. A pain, but may be worthwhile.
So, i'm not sure it has been decriminalised.
How they got hold of the cc number (not the card) is still a mystery. The only possibility is that they picked up the number from a transaction made somewhere, sometime.
It seems to me that one thing we can all do it to obtain new CC numbers every so often
To this day, the ring is still operating after 2 years, and our calls to the Mounties now go completely unanswered.
the police can really only take action is there is sufficient hard evidence to enable a successful prosecution - and sometimes it can take years to gather enough evidence to achieve that ..... and the police would have to justify taking action there instead of dealing with violent crimes / drug crimes / armed robberies etc etc
but that ring wouldn't be operating at all if merchants took their responsibilities seriously and checked transactions properly and cancelled the "fraudulent" transactions ..... you've done it, why can't other merchants do the same?
in fact, why worry about that fraud ring? you've protected your own business, it's other businesses that are losing out through their own neglect / incompetence / carelessness / greed or whatever .....
[edited by: RailMan at 3:44 pm (utc) on June 21, 2007]
The difficulty has always been that the money is stolen from the credit card company and not the consumer.
It seems to me that one thing we can all do it to obtain new CC numbers every so often. A pain, but may be worthwhile.
That does happen already with a couple of credit cards - when you use your card a temporary number is created for that transaction, so if anyone gets it they can't use it again. Some banks call them disposable transaction numbers.
Its not the point, fraud is fraud and crime is crime.
Don't get me wrong, I completely agree with you. A crime's a crime... but twist your MP's arm and get the law changed. Till then I can still go to jail if a burglar falls in my swimming pool that I forgot to cover for the night, I can still be jailed for defending my wife from attack by clubbing a mugger on the head, and complaining to the police about CC fraud is about as useful as picking my nose. Those are the facts on the ground. Campaign for merchants to bear less of the burden for fraud... and then the CC companies WILL start taking fraud a little more seriously.
Then withold a portion of your council tax for the bozo cops whose work has been now further reduced and who therefore deserve less money.
Campaign for merchants to bear less of the burden for fraud...
burden? what burden?
merchants who check transactions properly and take heed of warning signs generally don't suffer from fraud because they spot the frauds and cancel them
... and then the CC companies WILL start taking fraud a little more seriously.
the CC companies do take fraud seriously which is why they introduced chip and pin and now cardholder authentication ...
but the CC companies still have merchants who take ANY payment, no matter how suspicious .....
serious Q - would you accept a photocopied tenner in a shop? if not, then why accept a fraudulent credit card payment?
Even if it is very little.
It comes down to broken windows syndrome.
My point on it being decriminalised was that where the police dont do something about a complaint being made then it has to be in effect decriminalised.
Ignore credit card fraud (because the state doesnt lose out) but criminialise the non taxing of cars.
my point was ... that fraud is a crime
i agree 100%
but ....
if you spot the dodgy transaction and wipe it out (as any responsible merchant should do) then you haven't lost out, you're not the victim of crime and the only crime is an *attempted* fraud
it always has been and always will be the merchants responsibility to identify and reject fraudulent transactions ...
