Preloading your Credit Card before going on holidays

I don't find it hard to believe.

The €13k limit is a statutory obligation-regardless.

Before the Gardai are informed the bank in question will go through their own procedures-not every transaction will be reported as a matter of course.

But credit cards are not supposed to be routinely used in the manner we are discussing, i.e. keeping in relatively high levels of credit, and someone routinely doing this would certainly arouse my suspicions.
 
CCOVICH said:
The €13k limit is a statutory obligation-regardless.

Before the Gardai are informed the bank in question will go through their own procedures-not every transaction will be reported as a matter of course.
Click to expand...
It may be flagged as a fraud or suspicious usage pattern risk by the bank's internal systems but for them to claim that it is flagged as a money laundering risk sounds to me like a porky designed to scare the customer into not doing this! Don't forget that the bank have a vested interest in discouraging people from doing this and encouraging them to use CC cash advances or Cirrus/Maestro/Plus+ withdrawals instead.
But credit cards are not supposed to be routinely used in the manner we are discussing, i.e. keeping in relatively high levels of credit, and someone routinely doing this would certainly arouse my suspicions.
Click to expand...
Says who? No T&Cs quoted so far support this assertion.
 
I was referring to this:
But credit cards are not supposed to be routinely used in the manner we are discussing, i.e. keeping in relatively high levels of credit
Click to expand...
I have seen nothing so far that authoritatively states this to be the case for any CC in particular or CCs in general.
 
There was a time, many many moons ago the I used to get interest on the amount that I had in cr on my cc - like everything else that disappeared - therefore there should be no problem to pre-load if they were willing to pay interest.
 
CCOVICH said:
The official name of the product? Up to interpretation I guess.
Click to expand...
Not really. As with any financial product/agreement only the terms & conditions (subject to the law of the land) are authoritative and the final arbiter regardless of the name of the product. The point here is that this stuff is not a matter of interpretation - it's governed by the agreement and if that does not say that credit balances are a problem then they are not a problem.
 
ClubMan said:
Not really. As with any financial product/agreement only the terms & conditions (subject to the law of the land) are authoritative and the final arbiter regardless of the name of the product. The point here is that this stuff is not a matter of interpretation - it's governed by the agreement and if that does not say that credit balances are a problem then they are not a problem.
Click to expand...
Not to labour the point, but surely ts and cs of use can be implicit (what I am referring to) as well as explicit/expressly stated?
 
I don't think so. The written T&Cs are normally attached to the CC agreement and are the only ones that the customer explicitly signs up to. For a financial institution to vary or supplement these implicitly would surely be dodgy? Of course they may vary or supplement these explicitly from time to time by writing to the cardholder.

Anyway - take my own case in point: the PTSB ICE VISA card agreement and terms & conditions that I linked to earlier don't seem to have any specific limitations on having credit balances on the CC account or circumscribing the bank's liability in the case of fraudulent/unauthorised losses of such money. Does anybody disagree?
 
From todays Irish Indo

"Martin Warwick, head of Barclaycard's Fraud Operations, said Ireland's popularity with British visitors inevitably meant more cards being lost or stolen.

"However, I'd remind cardholders that their card is still safer than carrying cash, as cardholders are not held liable for any losses from fraudulent activity," he said."

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1655857&issue_id=14373


From what he's saying here, it would seem to me that the banks want you to preload your card rather than carry cash and if something goes wrong you will not be held liable for fraudulent activity. Mind you isn't this bloke from the same bank that the CEO said that he wouldn't allow his family to borrow money on their CC as it was too expensive


Murt
 
Hi

There is not a hard and fast rule for this, it depends on the bank, they will review indivual cases and base result on merit of case, but will be stricter on certain type of frauds, if your card is used to withdraw cash from ATM there will be stricter policy than if your card was used to purchase something in a shop or online, also depends on Merchants security, ie a shop which has not got chip'n'Pin, they would quickly raise a chargeback and your money would be returned.

So in Short a question you should raise with your bank before taking out cc, although i doubt you would get a straight answer.

i know A.I.B. and B.O.I. review it per case
 
CCOVICH said:
The €13k limit is a statutory obligation-regardless.
...credit cards are not supposed to be routinely used in the manner we are discussing, i.e. keeping in relatively high levels of credit,
Click to expand...

The title of this thread is "Preloading your Credit Card before going on holidays"

Most people go on holidays only a few times a year, certainly not "routinely"

Very few people I know spend €13k on their holidays. There should rarely be a need for anyone to preload their card to €13k for holiday purposes. As the original poster said "you are probably talking about a couple of thousand for a family".

Anyone who preloads their card with a couple of grand a few times a year is hardly likely to arouse money laundering suspicions. Anyone who regularly preloads their card with sums up to €13k could certainly expect to be watched closely. There is a big difference between the 2 scenarios.
 
Going on holidays a few times a year, for a few years, would suggest a routine, but again, that's open to interpretation.

As for ML, different banks etc. have different internal guidelines-it's not something I would be overly concerned about, but I do think that credits of a few thousand euro several times a year may raise certain flags. I'm basing this on experience-it's not speculation.

I'm not trying to engage in scaremongering-just want to inform people of potential risks.
 
I have a BOI card top it up every week with a couple of K used for work, I have never had anybody ring or question it.
 
holidays or othwise I preload my card every so often . the one thing to remember though is that if you lose a card which is in credit, that such credit ( or preloaded amount) is NOT covered by the reporting of the loss of the card, only when the card is in debit are the cc providers liable. so if you lose a card on holidays, and the card is used to purchase xxxxx, then you lose any money you had in credit on that card. I agree with the poster who says that most people wouldn't spend €13,000 on holidays so I would be suspicious of such amounts being preloaded. definitely.
 
the one thing to remember though is that if you lose a card which is in credit, that such credit ( or preloaded amount) is NOT covered by the reporting of the loss of the card, only when the card is in debit are the cc providers liable.
Click to expand...

Says who? See my earlier post. I agree it's a potential risk. I expect for small amounts the bank would cover it without question, or they would lose my custom. For larger amounts, I'd exhaust all regulatory and legal avenues available to me. I really can't see a court ruling in favour of a large bank if 1) I could prove they acted on fradulent instructions, 2) I reported the fraud in a reasonable time, and 3) the terms and conditions don't even mention this situation. Please prove me wrong.
 
The banks would have very deep pockets and if they lost they would simply keep appealing until they got to the supreme court.

I doubt that any normal person would have the funds to fight a bank all the way to the end of the line. The bank would have a vested interest in making sure you loose your case as the precedent would potentialy cost them millions.
 
I doubt that any normal person would have the funds to fight a bank all the way to the end of the line. The bank would have a vested interest in making sure you loose your case as the precedent would potentialy cost them millions.
Click to expand...

The Banks I would imagine would prefer to pay the money owed if it can be proved that it was stolen or used fraudulently as what Bank needs the adverse publicity of going to court against a customer?
Has anyone ever had this situation happen to them and what was the outcome.
If it is not in the terms & conditions of the card and the provider allows you to preload the card I can only imagine they have to pay you back or include it in the T&C's!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top