4 ms·
Consumers are already protected, the security is more for the banks. Contactless was made to not require a pin for transactions under a certain amount. It's mad
by dalore 10y ago
Consumers are already protected, the security is more for the banks. Contactless was made to not require a pin for transactions under a certain amount. It's made for convenience, no one is using it to steals 1000s. And if someone is using it to steal they aren't stealing from joe blow but from the banks.
It's not identity theft they are protecting, but bank fraud. If a merchant has a data breach and my credit card details are used to buy things online without my authorization, that isn't identity theft, but bank fraud to the bank. Since all I have to do is say that transaction isn't mine and poof it's gone.
- rjvs 10y agoIt's not just "poof it's gone" here. In Australia, if you dispute a credit card transaction, it still counts against your limit and your required repayments until the dispute is resolved. This can take months and be more than inconvenient.
- CaptainZapp 10y agoNot so in Switzerland. At least not with my bank. If I complain about a charge (which I will only do if it's truly fraudulent, or not possible to have been initiated by me) the amount is credited immediately while the bank is taking it up with the merchant. That's exactly the way it should be and if this is not the case you should probably be pushing for stronger consumer protection laws.