Slickdeals.net

Slickdeals.net (http://slickdeals.net/forums/index.php)
-   The Lounge (http://slickdeals.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Did You Know? There Are No Penalties for Illegal Credit Card Use? (http://slickdeals.net/f/5872338-did-you-know-there-are-no-penalties-for-illegal-credit-card-use)

Padmakumara 02-23-2013 12:01 PM

Did You Know? There Are No Penalties for Illegal Credit Card Use?
 
Just got off the phone with Chase Credit Protection Fraud cause someone tried to use my card to buy $323 worth of car parts online. She told me flat out that majority of the time nothing happens to these people.

I called StreetSideAuto.com, the website he ordered from, and they wouldn't give me his address. I don't understand why if they have an address, they still won't prosecute or find the guy. I've never heard of anyone using someone's card illegally and getting fined or jailed for it, have you?

If this guy knows he can get away with using credit card numbers illegally, then he's gonna keep on doing it. I don't understand what the deal is here. I can't do anything cause I'm not a cop.

Iaaaiws 02-23-2013 12:30 PM

It's a complicated problem with far-reaching implications. If they made sweeping laws with mandatory punishment for spending other people's money then pretty much all liberals would end up in jail or dead.

Zodiac 02-23-2013 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenq (Post 57780394)
Just got off the phone with Chase Credit Protection Fraud cause someone tried to use my card to buy $323 worth of car parts online. She told me flat out that majority of the time nothing happens to these people.

I called StreetSideAuto.com, the website he ordered from, and they wouldn't give me his address. I don't understand why if they have an address, they still won't prosecute or find the guy. I've never heard of anyone using someone's card illegally and getting fined or jailed for it, have you?

If this guy knows he can get away with using credit card numbers illegally, then he's gonna keep on doing it. I don't understand what the deal is here. I can't do anything cause I'm not a cop.

If the person used a stolen cc online he would need your billing address right? How do you know the shipping address isn't some random persons address where the thief will be waiting for the package?

handyguy 02-23-2013 02:19 PM

How did they get your info?

dzap 02-23-2013 02:30 PM

Day to day people, just like you, do this all the time. Here's a lost wallet someone found on Reddit. http://i.imgur.com/hLEqf.jpg


...card cloning in the US doesn't really have any big consequences since we still use the old magstripe system, while the rest of the world has moved on to Chip & PIN which puts the liability more into the hand of the consumer, because it is supposedly "fraud proof (it isn't but it's a helluva lot more secure than what we have now".


I could go on ebay grab a magstripe, grab a few cc#s by the dozen (probably more) for maybe $5 off some Russian forum, and grab some blank magstripe cards and a nice card printer and start cloning cards. The easy way of course is to just use and dump the numbers online, and not bother with physical cards at all, but depends on your use case.


When one card gets caught in the system, just toss it/destroy it, and move on to the next victim. Usually you just want to hit cards for a few hundred/thousand dollars and move on to the next one, because the fraud dept. will catch it quick.


No, I have not done it, but it's really not hard. Getting caught by the FBI for doing this though, is your real deterrent if you're a big player in doing this.

calistyle 02-23-2013 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzap (Post 57782550)
Day to day people, just like you, do this all the time. Here's a lost wallet someone found on Reddit. http://i.imgur.com/hLEqf.jpg


...card cloning in the US doesn't really have any big consequences since we still use the old magstripe system, while the rest of the world has moved on to Chip & PIN which puts the liability more into the hand of the consumer, because it is supposedly "fraud proof (it isn't but it's a helluva lot more secure than what we have now".


I could go on ebay grab a magstripe, grab a few cc#s by the dozen (probably more) for maybe $5 off some Russian forum, and grab some blank magstripe cards and a nice card printer and start cloning cards. The easy way of course is to just use and dump the numbers online, and not bother with physical cards at all, but depends on your use case.


When one card gets caught in the system, just toss it/destroy it, and move on to the next victim. Usually you just want to hit cards for a few hundred/thousand dollars and move on to the next one, because the fraud dept. will catch it quick.


No, I have not done it, but it's really not hard. Getting caught by the FBI for doing this though, is your real deterrent if you're a big player in doing this.

When are we going to make the transition to the "fraud-proof" cards?

dzap 02-23-2013 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calistyle (Post 57782896)
When are we going to make the transition to the "fraud-proof" cards?

Yeah well the problem we have right now, is we have to change EVERYTHING. I mean literally every, single POS system at every location in the entire country, to this. Pretty much we are holding any of that back though, as almost all Chip&PIN systems in the world allow for the traditional magstripe to be used as well for US based cards and in the rare, rare, rare, rare case that the Chip&PIN system is down for some reason.


Most merchants don't want to use magstripe though because the banking codes have been updated to pretty much put the liability on the merchant in case fraud happens if they process a classic magstripe transaction, vs. chip & PIN which puts the liability on the customer itself.


Pretty much you need BOA, Chase, Wells Fargo, Citibank, etc. the big banks to force it onto merchants. That's happening this year.


The UK/Western Europe started doing it back I think early 2005/2006 and they're more or less completely converted, at this point. I also remember when I was travelling throughout South East Asia about 2 years ago, all the POS systems/cards/ATMs were essentially converted for chip & PIN.


Canada will be completing their conversion by 2015, but we have barely started it at all. We're supposed to start this year (finally!)
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399772,00.asp

Here's a nifty little map of adoption worldwide (guess which huge economic global powerhouse country hasn't adopted it?)
http://cdn5.unibulmerchantservices.c...aud-2-Full.png

Some big banks like BOA, Chase, Citi have started issuing EMV/Chip*Pin/.Signature cards already for use ABROAD.
https://www.bankofamerica.com/credit-cards/chip-and-signature-faq.go

You can also see here a few BOA cards with the chip..
https://www.bankofamerica.com/credit-cards/view-all-credit-cards.go

Chase also has a few (again, for use abroad, since the chip is currently useless in the US)
https://creditcards.chase.com/credit-card-search.aspx

Looks like Citi has 7.
https://creditcards.citi.com/credit-cards/view-all-credit-cards

You can check here for a nice spreadsheet FlyerTalk has tried to keep up to date with Chip&PIN/signature cards in the US (or ones that you can convert to chip&PIN).
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ani-u3tGk5hedGRvcE1ELVg5UmlGZk01SHZvTUMxdUE#gid=0

TL;DR: This year. It'll take probably a few more years after that though before every merchant starts switching to chip&PIN/Signature (I personally prefer Chip&Signature). Most likely unless we have a government mandate, most businesses are just going to still use the old magstripe for their readers, unless they see a real benefit (such as in the UK where the liability shifts from merchant to consumer).

Padmakumara 02-23-2013 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calistyle (Post 57782896)
When are we going to make the transition to the "fraud-proof" cards?

I was in Canada yesterday. They put my credit card in a reader at a couple stores I went to and asked me to put my PIN number in. I told them I don't have a PIN number cause I'm from the United States. They were like, "Oh!"

Apparently credit cards in Canada have a magnetic stripe and a chip inside which works like an ATM card. It's an additional layer of security.

dzap 02-23-2013 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenq (Post 57784534)
I was in Canada yesterday. They put my credit card in a reader and asked me to put my PIN number in. I told them I don't have a PIN number cause I'm from the United States. They were like, "Oh!"

Apparently credit cards in Canada have a magnetic stripe and a chip inside which works like an ATM card. It's an additional layer of security.

Correct. They were probably thinking "Oh, he's from the third world. We'll have to process his transaction the old fashioned way." They should have known you were American though by lack of chip. Canadians are usually friendly I assume with that, but when I was at Starbucks in Singapore I handed them my Visa, they looked at me funny and said "You're American, aren't you?"


...and they had to pull out a different machine from the back counter to process the transaction. It's really embarrassing honestly because you hold the line up. Luckily in Japan I didn't have any of that crap, since they are very accommodating to foreigners.

Padmakumara 02-23-2013 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zodiac (Post 57781268)
If the person used a stolen cc online he would need your billing address right? How do you know the shipping address isn't some random persons address where the thief will be waiting for the package?

Quote:

Originally Posted by handyguy (Post 57782390)
How did they get your info?

I'm guessing he didn't need my billing address to complete the transaction onine. Streetsideauto.com doesn't look like a big outfit so maybe they don't require it. I don't know how they got my cc number. There's lots of opportunities for people to get it. They could get it from a retailer I went to. When you give your credit card to the waiter do you really know what they are doing with it?

The card is a Chase Sapphire card. It's made of metal. The numbers aren't printed brazenly on the front like most credit cards but rather the back underneath the signature. It looks like it's laser etched into the metal in thin smaller case which makes it hard to see. It's annoying to me because I own the card and it's hard for me to use sometimes cause the numbers are hard to see.

Squilly2314 02-23-2013 06:03 PM

Surprising. FBI has been doing some huge busts lately for credit card fraud. Anyone hear about Operation Carder Profit?

dzap 02-23-2013 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squilly (Post 57785186)
Surprising. FBI has been doing some huge busts lately for credit card fraud. Anyone hear about Operation Carder Profit?

Yup.
Geographical distribution of the arrests: United Kingdom (6 arrests), Bosnia (2), Bulgaria (1), Norway (1), and Germany (1)
..no one in the US though (considering $205 million was at stake, no shit. I wouldn't want to set foot on US territory either...)

But that's all it takes. 11 people. $205 million. 411,000 credit and debit card numbers. Most of which I believe are US numbers because the rest of the world has pretty much moved on to the EMV standard or have way stricter banking regulations (e.g. In Japan if you wish to do online banking, you must physically walk into a branch and register and confirm with paperwork. You are not allowed to sign up online).

Squilly2314 02-23-2013 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzap (Post 57785804)
Yup.
Geographical distribution of the arrests: United Kingdom (6 arrests), Bosnia (2), Bulgaria (1), Norway (1), and Germany (1)
..no one in the US though (considering $205 million was at stake, no shit. I wouldn't want to set foot on US territory either...)

But that's all it takes. 11 people. $205 million. 411,000 credit and debit card numbers. Most of which I believe are US numbers because the rest of the world has pretty much moved on to the EMV standard or have way stricter banking regulations (e.g. In Japan if you wish to do online banking, you must physically walk into a branch and register and confirm with paperwork. You are not allowed to sign up online).

Pretty sure 13 were arrested from the US

Zodiac 02-23-2013 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzap (Post 57785804)
Yup.
Geographical distribution of the arrests: United Kingdom (6 arrests), Bosnia (2), Bulgaria (1), Norway (1), and Germany (1)
..no one in the US though (considering $205 million was at stake, no shit. I wouldn't want to set foot on US territory either...)

But that's all it takes. 11 people. $205 million. 411,000 credit and debit card numbers. Most of which I believe are US numbers because the rest of the world has pretty much moved on to the EMV standard or have way stricter banking regulations (e.g. In Japan if you wish to do online banking, you must physically walk into a branch and register and confirm with paperwork. You are not allowed to sign up online).

If Operation Carder Profit is the same as Operation Card Shop:

Quote:

Today’s coordinated action—involving 13 countries, including the United States—resulted in 24 arrests, including the domestic arrests of 11 individuals by federal and local authorities in the United States, and the arrests of 13 individuals abroad by foreign law enforcement in seven countries.
https://www.fbi.gov/newyork/press...e-takedown

Squilly2314 02-24-2013 07:10 AM

Oh... 11 in the US. And yeah, Card Shop.

handyguy 02-24-2013 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calistyle (Post 57782896)
When are we going to make the transition to the "fraud-proof" cards?

You're supposed to sign the back of it & they check that. Some write "See ID" but that is against the contract.

dalokgawd 02-24-2013 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by handyguy (Post 57793166)
You're supposed to sign the back of it & they check that. Some write "See ID" but that is against the contract.

I put Check ID on my card. Signing the back of your credit card is stupid. It's like writing your PIN number on the back of your ATM card. If someone steals your card they have your signature right there to copy. I have never understood why anyone would sign the back of a credit card. :dontknow:

setsail 02-24-2013 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57798638)
I put Check ID on my card. Signing the back of your credit card is stupid. It's like writing your PIN number on the back of your ATM card. If someone steals your card they have your signature right there to copy. I have never understood why anyone would sign the back of a credit card. :dontknow:

If you don't sign your card, and they do, :bulb: the signature matches.

dalokgawd 02-25-2013 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by setsail (Post 57804008)
If you don't sign your card, and they do, :bulb: the signature matches.

If you put Check ID on the card, then they can't sign the back of it now can they? :wave:

Jabbit 02-25-2013 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57807740)
If you put Check ID on the card, then they can't sign the back of it now can they? :wave:

Check ID is not a valid signature, but most people don't know that so they won't call you out on it.

dalokgawd 02-25-2013 05:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jabbit (Post 57807928)
Check ID is not a valid signature, but most people don't know that so they won't call you out on it.

Who's gonna call me out on it? The waitress? The guy working the register at Walmart? What the hell do they care even if they do know? It's not like the credit card company is sending out spies to check and see if people are complying with the user agreement by signing the back of their credit cards...

teenbean 02-25-2013 06:06 AM

Most of the time you don't even have to sign a credit card slip if the purchase is under a certain amount of $.

Dr. J 02-25-2013 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57798638)
I put Check ID on my card. Signing the back of your credit card is stupid. It's like writing your PIN number on the back of your ATM card. If someone steals your card they have your signature right there to copy. I have never understood why anyone would sign the back of a credit card. :dontknow:


I was at a PO once and the guy ahead of me had that written on the back of his card AND THEY REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE CARD BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T MATCH THE SIGNATURE. :lol:

setsail 02-25-2013 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57808010)
Who's gonna call me out on it? The waitress? The guy working the register at Walmart? What the hell do they care even if they do know? It's not like the credit card company is sending out spies to check and see if people are complying with the user agreement by signing the back of their credit cards...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. J (Post 57810800)
I was at a PO once and the guy ahead of me had that written on the back of his card AND THEY REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE CARD BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T MATCH THE SIGNATURE. :lol:

I worked at a credit union for several years and we could not accept a card from a member unless it was signed with a signature, even if it meant waiting for them to ride out their temper tantrum because they couldn't have it their way.

It's for a cardholder's own protection that signature is required. Write see id all over the rest of the area but the card should still be signed.

ashcampbell 02-25-2013 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jabbit (Post 57807928)
Check ID is not a valid signature, but most people don't know that so they won't call you out on it.

I've had the post office call me on an unsiged one. So I signed it right in front of him. He accepted and then I scraped it off, also in front of him.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. J (Post 57810800)
I was at a PO once and the guy ahead of me had that written on the back of his card AND THEY REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE CARD BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T MATCH THE SIGNATURE. :lol:

heheh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by setsail (Post 57810916)
I worked at a credit union for several years and we could not accept a card from a member unless it was signed with a signature, even if it meant waiting for them to ride out their temper tantrum because they couldn't have it their way.

It's for a cardholder's own protection that signature is required. Write see id all over the rest of the area but the card should still be signed.

So if I just make some swiggles and then put SEE ID thats fine?

dalokgawd 02-25-2013 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by setsail (Post 57810916)
I worked at a credit union for several years and we could not accept a card from a member unless it was signed with a signature, even if it meant waiting for them to ride out their temper tantrum because they couldn't have it their way.

It's for a cardholder's own protection that signature is required. Write see id all over the rest of the area but the card should still be signed.

If someone did that to me I would never patronize that business again. Forcing someone to sign the back of a credit card is a ludicrous thing for a business to do. Checking ID makes it more difficult to commit fraud, which any business with a reasonable thought process should be all for.

handyguy 02-25-2013 09:10 AM

"Technically, a MasterCard is not valid unless signed by the authorized cardholder. If a person has not signed his card, the merchant technically should not complete the transaction." The merchant can only complete the transaction on an unsigned card if the cardholder signs the card in front of the employee and then produces valid identification proving their identity, Monteiro says. The cardholder then has nothing to gain by refusing to write anything but his signature on the signature panel.

Read more: http://www.creditcards.com/credit...z2LvpeFfx6


dalokgawd 02-25-2013 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by handyguy (Post 57812288)
"Technically, a MasterCard is not valid unless signed by the authorized cardholder. If a person has not signed his card, the merchant technically should not complete the transaction." The merchant can only complete the transaction on an unsigned card if the cardholder signs the card in front of the employee and then produces valid identification proving their identity, Monteiro says. The cardholder then has nothing to gain by refusing to write anything but his signature on the signature panel.

Read more: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/sign-or-write-see-ID-1282.php#ixzz2LvpeFfx6


I'm not arguing that you're not SUPPOSED to sign the back of your credit card. I'm saying that it's stupid to do so.

In Gainesville, GA there's a law that says chicken must be eaten with your hands [dumblaws.com]. I don't see KFCs having people arrested for eating their chicken tenders with a fork and knife.

Zodiac 02-25-2013 10:27 AM

Who here actually has a single signature they use?

My signatures always tend to vary most of the time (especially on machines that require signatures).

I don't think the signature on my card would match what I scribble on the receipts anyways lol

thikthird 02-25-2013 11:15 AM

let's not act like those signatures don't rub off after like a week of coming in and out of your wallet and being swiped. all mine on me are either an unrecognizable blur or the white area has been completely scraped off.

that said, once or twice i've had people call me on not having a card signed (brand new card) or the signature being unrecognizable/rubbed off. in those cases i showed i.d.

MtnTripp 02-25-2013 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by setsail (Post 57810916)
I worked at a credit union for several years and we could not accept a card from a member unless it was signed with a signature, even if it meant waiting for them to ride out their temper tantrum because they couldn't have it their way.

It's for a cardholder's own protection that signature is required. Write see id all over the rest of the area but the card should still be signed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57812116)
If someone did that to me I would never patronize that business again. Forcing someone to sign the back of a credit card is a ludicrous thing for a business to do. Checking ID makes it more difficult to commit fraud, which any business with a reasonable thought process should be all for.

I've been working in retail for almost 10 years. Do you have any idea how ticked off some customers get when I ask to see their ID for credit cards or personal checks?! Majority... some people just aren't happy no matter what precautions are trying to be taken to prevent fraud, if it causes them any inconvenience... So, with the system we have set up right now somebody is going to have to tick off the card holder (bank and/or business) in order to try and prevent fraud for the cardholder.
I also do not like putting my signature on my cards in case they are stolen, but it can't be worse the when you sign a credit card slip or a check, whoever you hand that piece of paper to now has a copy of your signature.

Amaylin 02-25-2013 12:22 PM

yeah, my credit card got stolen once and someone almost bought a car with it.

Foreveryours 02-25-2013 12:30 PM

Not signing the card is more stupid.

dalokgawd 02-25-2013 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MtnTripp (Post 57817194)
I've been working in retail for almost 10 years. Do you have any idea how ticked off some customers get when I ask to see their ID for credit cards or personal checks?! Majority... some people just aren't happy no matter what precautions are trying to be taken to prevent fraud, if it causes them any inconvenience... So, with the system we have set up right now somebody is going to have to tick off the card holder (bank and/or business) in order to try and prevent fraud for the cardholder.
I also do not like putting my signature on my cards in case they are stolen, but it can't be worse the when you sign a credit card slip or a check, whoever you hand that piece of paper to now has a copy of your signature.

I am always happy when they ask to see my ID. I always think to myself, well if my credit card gets stolen and the thief comes here, at least they won't get away with it. And when I sign a check, on the rare occasions that I still use a check, having my signature does the person no good because they don't have my checkbook. Whereas if someone gets a hold of my credit card and it has the signature on the back, they have the card AND the method required to fraudulently use it without getting caught in one nice little bundle.

Foreveryours 02-25-2013 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57818274)
I am always happy when they ask to see my ID. I always think to myself, well if my credit card gets stolen and the thief comes here, at least they won't get away with it. And when I sign a check, on the rare occasions that I still use a check, having my signature does the person no good because they don't have my checkbook. Whereas if someone gets a hold of my credit card and it has the signature on the back, they have the card AND the method required to fraudulently use it without getting caught in one nice little bundle.

How is having your credit card and your signature more beneficial to a thief compared to the one who has your card and the opportunity to fill it with his version?

MtnTripp 02-25-2013 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57818274)
I am always happy when they ask to see my ID. I always think to myself, well if my credit card gets stolen and the thief comes here, at least they won't get away with it. And when I sign a check, on the rare occasions that I still use a check, having my signature does the person no good because they don't have my checkbook. Whereas if someone gets a hold of my credit card and it has the signature on the back, they have the card AND the method required to fraudulently use it without getting caught in one nice little bundle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foreveryours (Post 57818426)
How is having your credit card and your signature more beneficial to a thief compared to the one who has your card and the opportunity to fill it with his version?

Good point Foreveryours.

You know... I'm wondering, if someone wrote "See ID" on the card, could the person who steals it not just mark through it and write in a fake signature? Can a business that just checks the signature (and doesn't ask for ID's unless it's on the card) actually question that and deny the card?

ALVSGIRLY 02-25-2013 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MtnTripp (Post 57817194)
I've been working in retail for almost 10 years. Do you have any idea how ticked off some customers get when I ask to see their ID for credit cards or personal checks?! Majority... some people just aren't happy no matter what precautions are trying to be taken to prevent fraud, if it causes them any inconvenience... So, with the system we have set up right now somebody is going to have to tick off the card holder (bank and/or business) in order to try and prevent fraud for the cardholder.
I also do not like putting my signature on my cards in case they are stolen, but it can't be worse the when you sign a credit card slip or a check, whoever you hand that piece of paper to now has a copy of your signature.

I love it when they check. I use my dh's card all the time. It is hardly ever questioned. It's kind of scary when you think about it.

dalokgawd 02-25-2013 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foreveryours (Post 57818426)
How is having your credit card and your signature more beneficial to a thief compared to the one who has your card and the opportunity to fill it with his version?

How is he going to fill it with his signature when the words CHECK ID are written across the back in huge letters? :dontknow:

Quote:

Originally Posted by MtnTripp (Post 57818972)
Good point Foreveryours.

You know... I'm wondering, if someone wrote "See ID" on the card, could the person who steals it not just mark through it and write in a fake signature? Can a business that just checks the signature (and doesn't ask for ID's unless it's on the card) actually question that and deny the card?

Considering my CHECK ID takes up 75% of the panel in the back, I would think that it would be a pretty big red flag for whoever is checking the back of the card.

Tonedeaf 02-25-2013 02:13 PM

Haven't had anyone actually check the back of the card in so long. I did however have 2 fraudulent charges with my card over the weekend.

Hawk2007 02-25-2013 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thikthird (Post 57815936)
let's not act like those signatures don't rub off after like a week of coming in and out of your wallet and being swiped. all mine on me are either an unrecognizable blur or the white area has been completely scraped off.

that said, once or twice i've had people call me on not having a card signed (brand new card) or the signature being unrecognizable/rubbed off. in those cases i showed i.d.


Wow, a rational post.

Try a few hours....I just received a new CC after mine was fraudulently used. I signed it with a Pilot G-2 pen, and let it sit for a few hours.... didn't even think about the whole drying time or anything like that.... just signed it and left it on the desk.

I picked it up after a few hours and the signature smudges....

teenbean 02-25-2013 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57820554)
How is he going to fill it with his signature when the words CHECK ID are written across the back in huge letters? :dontknow:


Considering my CHECK ID takes up 75% of the panel in the back, I would think that it would be a pretty big red flag for whoever is checking the back of the card.



Maybe if they used White Out!

dalokgawd 02-25-2013 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teenbean (Post 57824452)
Maybe if they used White Out!

Well if they're gonna do that they could white out a signature just as easy couldn't they? :lol:

MtnTripp 02-26-2013 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57820554)
How is he going to fill it with his signature when the words CHECK ID are written across the back in huge letters? :dontknow:


Considering my CHECK ID takes up 75% of the panel in the back, I would think that it would be a pretty big red flag for whoever is checking the back of the card.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57824532)
Well if they're gonna do that they could white out a signature just as easy couldn't they? :lol:

The thief could just write CHECK ID as their signature :bleh:

MtnTripp 02-26-2013 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALVSGIRLY (Post 57819118)
I love it when they check. I use my dh's card all the time. It is hardly ever questioned. It's kind of scary when you think about it.

Yeah I would say, lol. Nothing is very secure anymore.

Frogstar 02-26-2013 11:09 AM

http://www.zug.com/pranks/credit/

dalokgawd 02-26-2013 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MtnTripp (Post 57841040)
The thief could just write CHECK ID as their signature :bleh:

Brain. Exploding. :blowup:

redmaxx 02-26-2013 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57820554)
Considering my CHECK ID takes up 75% of the panel in the back, I would think that it would be a pretty big red flag for whoever is checking the back of the card.

Considering that almost no one checks the card itself, the only thing you're really accomplishing by putting "CHECK ID" on there is sticking all the losses with the merchant. You see, it's against the merchant agreement for the merchant to accept the card without a valid signature. So when your card is stolen and you yell at the bank saying "No one should have taken it, it's got "CHECK ID" on it!" they'll file that away into their case and then reverse all the transactions on the merchant account. The merchant violated the agreement, they will eat the loss and your prices will go up. Versus letting the ridiculously lazy and profitable bank eat the cost, where it belongs, because no retail employee really has the power to actually stop fraud...

Foreveryours 02-26-2013 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57845246)
Considering that almost no one checks the card itself, the only thing you're really accomplishing by putting "CHECK ID" on there is sticking all the losses with the merchant. You see, it's against the merchant agreement for the merchant to accept the card without a valid signature. So when your card is stolen and you yell at the bank saying "No one should have taken it, it's got "CHECK ID" on it!" they'll file that away into their case and then reverse all the transactions on the merchant account. The merchant violated the agreement, they will eat the loss and your prices will go up. Versus letting the ridiculously lazy and profitable bank eat the cost, where it belongs, because no retail employee really has the power to actually stop fraud...

:iagree:


Everyone thinks they know what's best for everyone, even though it's usually what's most convenient for themselves only and most of the times not even what's best for them :lol:

Hawk2007 02-26-2013 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57845246)
Considering that almost no one checks the card itself, the only thing you're really accomplishing by putting "CHECK ID" on there is sticking all the losses with the merchant. You see, it's against the merchant agreement for the merchant to accept the card without a valid signature. So when your card is stolen and you yell at the bank saying "No one should have taken it, it's got "CHECK ID" on it!" they'll file that away into their case and then reverse all the transactions on the merchant account. The merchant violated the agreement, they will eat the loss and your prices will go up. Versus letting the ridiculously lazy and profitable bank eat the cost, where it belongs, because no retail employee really has the power to actually stop fraud...



So what happens when the retailer is Wal-Mart and the banker is Bank of America?

Do liberal heads explode at that point?

dalokgawd 02-26-2013 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57845246)
Considering that almost no one checks the card itself, the only thing you're really accomplishing by putting "CHECK ID" on there is sticking all the losses with the merchant. You see, it's against the merchant agreement for the merchant to accept the card without a valid signature. So when your card is stolen and you yell at the bank saying "No one should have taken it, it's got "CHECK ID" on it!" they'll file that away into their case and then reverse all the transactions on the merchant account. The merchant violated the agreement, they will eat the loss and your prices will go up. Versus letting the ridiculously lazy and profitable bank eat the cost, where it belongs, because no retail employee really has the power to actually stop fraud...

If the retailer just checked the person's ID like the back of the card says, they would realize that the person's name does not match the name on the card and there would be no lawsuit in the first place. If the retailer gets sued its because they didn't check the back of the card and they deserve what they get.

redmaxx 02-26-2013 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57849730)
If the retailer just checked the person's ID like the back of the card says, they would realize that the person's name does not match the name on the card and there would be no lawsuit in the first place. If the retailer gets sued its because they didn't check the back of the card and they deserve what they get.

It's a silly rule, but the only thing you're accomplishing is raising everyone's prices. Thanks! :rolleyes:

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57852576)
It's a silly rule, but the only thing you're accomplishing is raising everyone's prices. Thanks! :rolleyes:

Since I'm doing nothing of the sort, you're welcome! Enjoy your strawman! :thumbup:

MtnTripp 02-27-2013 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frogstar (Post 57841190)

HA, this is great! Am I the only person who took time to check out this link?

My favorite would have to be
"I signed a credit card receipt "Mickey Mouse" in Disneyland once because I was fed up with not having the signature checked. I never paid for the item. I still don't know what happened, it just never showed up on my statement."

Apparently Mickey Mouse has VIP status in disney land.

redmaxx 02-27-2013 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57856268)
Since I'm doing nothing of the sort, you're welcome! Enjoy your strawman! :thumbup:

Shoot, did I click on the Podium by mistake? Because they're the sort to ignore simple logic to doggedly stick to their invalid views...

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57858744)
Shoot, did I click on the Podium by mistake? Because they're the sort to ignore simple logic to doggedly stick to their invalid views...

They're also the sort that make up fanciful and extreme examples to justify their nonsensical and baseless arguments! :D

redmaxx 02-27-2013 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57859320)
They're also the sort that make up fanciful and extreme examples to justify their nonsensical and baseless arguments! :D

There's nothing extreme. It's explicitly in the merchant agreement what a merchant has to do. Banks mercilessly pursue any avenue they can to stick merchants with losses. So can you do 1+1+1=3 or do you need me to get some pictures of cookies to help you out?

Foreveryours 02-27-2013 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57859644)
There's nothing extreme. It's explicitly in the merchant agreement what a merchant has to do. Banks mercilessly pursue any avenue they can to stick merchants with losses. So can you do 1+1+1=3 or do you need me to get some pictures of cookies to help you out?

Why can't you accept he knows what's best for everyone? :confused:

handyguy 02-27-2013 09:26 AM

If you say CHECK ID on your CC, they get to see your ID & that has your address, age & other stuff on it. A serial rapist who works for a local liquor store would sometimes show up at womens homes, getting their nfo from their DL.

So why not just get a CC that has your picture on it? Mine do.

Frogstar 02-27-2013 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by handyguy (Post 57861962)
If you say CHECK ID on your CC, they get to see your ID & that has your address, age & other stuff on it. A serial rapist who works for a local liquor store would sometimes show up at womens homes, getting their nfo from their DL.

So why not just get a CC that has your picture on it? Mine do.

But then they'll know what I look like!

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57859644)
There's nothing extreme. It's explicitly in the merchant agreement what a merchant has to do. Banks mercilessly pursue any avenue they can to stick merchants with losses. So can you do 1+1+1=3 or do you need me to get some pictures of cookies to help you out?

If the merchant fails to check the back of the card, it doesn't matter whether it's my signature, CHECK ID, or a picture of Edward James Olmos' ass on the back of the card, now does it? In either case the merchant will fail to detect the fraud and the credit card company will reverse the charges against the merchant. Therefore, writing CHECK ID on the back of the card has absolutely nothing to do with raising prices.

So, I reiterate, your argument has no merit, is a strawman fallacy, and you have no leg to stand on. Go back to the Podium where this sort of thing actually works and your fellow conservatives are impressed by your ability to mimic Fox News' level of discourse.

Foreveryours 02-27-2013 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57863786)
..., or a picture of Edward James Olmos' ass on the back of the card, now does it?

Why'd you have to go there? Now I have Edward's pockmarked ass for a visual :(

redmaxx 02-27-2013 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57863786)
If the merchant fails to check the back of the card, it doesn't matter whether it's my signature, CHECK ID, or a picture of Edward James Olmos' ass on the back of the card, now does it? In either case the merchant will fail to detect the fraud and the credit card company will reverse the charges against the merchant. Therefore, writing CHECK ID on the back of the card has absolutely nothing to do with raising prices.

You writing CHECK ID on the back of the card makes it impossible for the merchant to fulfill their agreement.

Quote:

So, I reiterate, your argument has no merit, is a strawman fallacy, and you have no leg to stand on. Go back to the Podium where this sort of thing actually works and your fellow conservatives are impressed by your ability to mimic Fox News' level of discourse.
I don't visit the Podium any longer. Reasoning and selfishness like yours is why.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foreveryours (Post 57861544)
Why can't you accept he knows what's best for everyone? :confused:

I guess I'm going to have to. :sadwalk:

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57866446)
You writing CHECK ID on the back of the card makes it impossible for the merchant to fulfill their agreement.

I don't visit the Podium any longer. Reasoning and selfishness like yours is why.

The ability of the merchant to fulfill the agreement is meaningless as long as no fraud is committed. Your entire argument was based on the idea that some fraud happened, and retail prices went up because the credit card company held the merchant responsible because they were unable to prevent the fraud. If the merchant checks the back of the card and it says CHECK ID their ability to prevent the fraud is no different than their ability to prevent the fraud if the card was signed. Whether it says CHECK ID or is signed makes absolutely zero difference in whether the merchant is able to prevent the fraud or not. If the card were signed instead of having CHECK ID written on it, and the merchant fails to verify the signature, they are just as liable for the damages as if the card said CHECK ID, or was blank, or had SUCK IT TREBEK written on it. Your entire argument that writing CHECK ID makes them more liable for the cost of the fraud makes absolutely no sense whatsoever because they would be liable for the damages of the fraud ANYWAYS if they fail to verify that the card is in the hands of the owner which they can do just as easily if the card says CHECK ID.

I'm sorry to hear that you are allergic to logic, but it explains a lot.

redmaxx 02-27-2013 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57867872)
The ability of the merchant to fulfill the agreement is meaningless as long as no fraud is committed. Your entire argument was based on the idea that some fraud happened, and retail prices went up because the credit card company held the merchant responsible because they were unable to prevent the fraud. If the merchant checks the back of the card and it says CHECK ID their ability to prevent the fraud is no different than their ability to prevent the fraud if the card was signed. Whether it says CHECK ID or is signed makes absolutely zero difference in whether the merchant is able to prevent the fraud or not. If the card were signed instead of having CHECK ID written on it, and the merchant fails to verify the signature, they are just as liable for the damages as if the card said CHECK ID, or was blank, or had SUCK IT TREBEK written on it. Your entire argument that writing CHECK ID makes them more liable for the cost of the fraud makes absolutely no sense whatsoever because they would be liable for the damages of the fraud ANYWAYS if they fail to verify that the card is in the hands of the owner which they can do just as easily if the card says CHECK ID.

I'm sorry to hear that you are allergic to logic, but it explains a lot.

You make the seriously flawed assumption that the cashier is in any real position to check your ID and make a reasonably certain determination that you are who you say you are. There are a multitude of reasons why this is not the case, but the leading two are store policy, and the fact that stores are not staffing people experienced in identity verification. Thus, the end result (If A, then B, if B then C, etc.) is that fraud committed against your card, and anyone else that writes CHECK ID, is that prices for everyone go up.

I'm sorry you can't think through all the dependencies required to fulfill your demands, but that's the basis for your flawed supposition that I can't follow logic. Get on my level. ;)

Iaaaiws 02-27-2013 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57867872)
I'm sorry to hear that you are allergic to logic, but it explains a lot.

:eek:

I had no idea that could spread from liberals to rational humans. I hope there is a cure. :pray:

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmaxx (Post 57869710)
Get on my level. ;)

I guess I could eat some paint chips and lose a few dozen IQ points... :dontknow: But then I might have to register as a Republican... :scratch:

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iaaaiws (Post 57870524)
:eek:

I had no idea that could spread from liberals to rational humans. I hope there is a cure. :pray:

Take 2 hours of Fox News and call me when you have been sufficiently inundated with mental bullshit that you can say "Obama was born in Kenya" with a straight face.

P.S. - If you guys are insistent on turning the Lounge into the Podium then I guess I will have to react appropriately...

Iaaaiws 02-27-2013 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57872376)
Take 2 hours of Fox News and call me when you have been sufficiently inundated with mental bullshit that you can say "Obama was born in Kenya" with a straight face.

I miss the days when you had a sense of humor :sadwalk:

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iaaaiws (Post 57872414)
I miss the days when you had a sense of humor :sadwalk:

I miss the days when I could post in the Lounge without having to read partisan political attacks all the time. :dontknow:

redmaxx 02-27-2013 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57872332)
I guess I could eat some paint chips and lose a few dozen IQ points... :dontknow: But then I might have to register as a Republican... :scratch:

:lol:

Iaaaiws 02-27-2013 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57872582)
I miss the days when I could post in the Lounge without having to read partisan political attacks all the time. :dontknow:

I guess I overlooked the same indignation from you all during the Bush years when the attacks were coming from the other direction.

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iaaaiws (Post 57872972)
I guess I overlooked the same indignation from you all during the Bush years when the attacks were coming from the other direction.

1) I don't think I was even posting on SD during the majority of the W. presidency.
2) If I was ranting on W., I would have done it in The Podium where it belongs, not in The Lounge.

Now that I'm thinking about it I might be wrong on that first one... I think my SD hiatus was like 2006-2010 or so... it's hard to remember.

Iaaaiws 02-27-2013 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalokgawd (Post 57873010)
1) I don't think I was even posting on SD during the majority of the W. presidency.
2) If I was ranting on W., I would have done it in The Podium where it belongs, not in The Lounge.

Now that I'm thinking about it I might be wrong on that first one... I think my SD hiatus was like 2006-2010 or so... it's hard to remember.

I didn't mean you specifically. I also didn't realize that you would just be upset about partisan comments to you exclusively--I thought you meant in general which means that such comments in both directions should be equally offensive.

dalokgawd 02-27-2013 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iaaaiws (Post 57873122)
I didn't mean you specifically. I also didn't realize that you would just be upset about partisan comments to you exclusively--I thought you meant in general which means that such comments in both directions should be equally offensive.

I don't particularly appreciate partisan comments in any direction when they're in The Lounge. We have The Podium for stuff like that so I don't see why we should have that sort of thing in The Lounge as well...

Oh I am dumb. I completely misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were intimating that I posted partisan political stuff about W. in The Lounge back in the day. You meant why wasn't I railing against partisan political stuff in The Lounge when people were pissed off about W. back then the way I am railing about the anti liberal stuff now? Honestly I probably didn't care back then. I was a regular in The Podium back then and had a much higher tolerance for partisan politics back then. There's a reason I don't post in The Podium anymore, I just don't really enjoy that sort of stuff anymore. Not sure why, maybe I just have so many other things to worry about these days that I don't have room for political discourse anymore... :dontknow:

Zodiac 02-27-2013 05:25 PM

http://www.pitch.com/binary/ca1d/thi...e_children.jpg

Foreveryours 02-27-2013 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iaaaiws (Post 57872414)
I miss the days when you had a sense of humor :sadwalk:

:iagree:

:olo:


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:18 PM.


1999-2014