LDFerguson
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,823
Many online sites put through a request for authorisation for a $1 charge as part of the validation of a credit card number.jem said:then there was an attempt at two $1 transactions which set their alarm bells working.
elcato said:Hi Liam - I would refuse to pay on any goods as the signature would not have matched. Signature not matching is at worst the retailer or banks fault. Be aware that the banks will try anything to pass the book (as you're well aware of). This actually happened to a friend of mine who didn't notice it till €1500 was 'removed' via the buying of goods and cashback and she stood firm till the banks refunded her.
I wonder if you're breaching the T's&C's of the card by not signing it (regardless of whether it is a good idea or not). Could this increase your liability in any way if the card is stolen? It would certainly make it easy for a family member who shares your name to rip you off if they got their hands on your card!bacchus said:I have never signed at the back of any of my cards. This is the most ridiculous thing one can do . Why? by signing, you actually say to the potential thief "here is my card and here is how to use it. Happy shopping".
All my cards are written "Refer to ID" at the back. Downside, you always need to carry an ID with you...
Presumably because the required secure (online) infrastructure was not in place to securely and reliably authenticate the PIN as proof of identity up to now.bacchus said:What i can not figure out is why the PIN has not been used for the last 20 years to validate card ownership when paying in a shop. Don't we all have to punch a PIN when withdrawing cash from an ATM?
MonsieurBond posted a good objective/skeptical link about chip and PIN here that's worth reading.All cards (with or without chip) have a PIN which is written on the magnetic strip and on the chip (if fitted).
Chip technology has been used in some country since the 1980's. It is being introduced in Ireland in 2005 !!
RainyDay said:I wonder if you're breaching the T's&C's of the card by not signing it (regardless of whether it is a good idea or not). Could this increase your liability in any way if the card is stolen? It would certainly make it easy for a family member who shares your name to rip you off if they got their hands on your card!
I wonder what would happen if someone stole your card and used it to be buy goods by signing the receipt "Refer to ID"? Signatures don't have to be your name.bacchus said:All my cards are written "Refer to ID" at the back.
I have never signed at the back of any of my cards. This is the most ridiculous thing one can do . Why? by signing, you actually say to the potential thief "here is my card and here is how to use it. Happy shopping".
Yes - And they, the retailer will be liable for not checking that the signatures dont match. It's their responsiblity to do this.I have recently been watching very closely any laser/visa transactions that I had to sign for and I find that 99% of the cashiers do not compare the signature on the card with the signed receipt.
This would be crazy. By not signing you are saying to the thief 'if you cant match my signature just sign here and it will always match'. In this case you will be liable for any loss as has been pointed out by a later poster.I have never signed at the back of any of my cards. This is the most ridiculous thing one can do . Why? by signing, you actually say to the potential thief "here is my card and here is how to use it. Happy shopping".
Is that so? Really? That's amazing.lemeister said:Signatures don't have to be your name.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?