3 ms·
> on Saturday, she became waylaid after her card was declined – something which later transpired to be because she had carried out more than the permitted numbe
by Karellen 4y ago
> on Saturday, she became waylaid after her card was declined – something which later transpired to be because she had carried out more than the permitted number of Apple Pay transactions in a single day.
I thought the point of contactless payments, like with Apple Pay, was that there are fairly low per-transaction spend limits because it's "supposed" to be used for all the little purchases you make throughout the day.
But if there are also strict transaction volume limits, what the heck is the point? "Yeah, you can use this payment method for some of your small purchases during the day, but you still have to carry cash for the rest."
Like, WTF?
Or you could just stick with cash, and not allow a 3rd party to decide how often you can spend your money, or who you can spend it with. Or keep track of who you spend it with (and presumably sell that data to advertisers^W"partners", like you agreed they could.)
- squiffsquiff 4y agoThis is unlikely to have been an Apple pay specific issue. There's a lot of transaction pattern matching on card payments in the UK. You may get your transactions blocked if the card provider thinks they're suspicious. You can contact your provider and get it unblocked again. In this case it's pretty clearly uncharacteristic behaviour by any measure, including the geographical movement between transactions.
- TeMPOraL 4y ago"Uncharacteristic". Every time I read about cases like this, my mind repeats the phrase that is a title of a niche (but prophetic) song I've heard long time ago: random is resistance.
- Klaster_1 4y agoAny chance it's the War on Error by Rotersand? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5h3wiqR9fb8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5h3wiqR9fb8
- mitchbob 4y agoGot "video unavailable" for this link, but found it at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUD79C0z8Qw&ab_channel=Rotersand-Topic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUD79C0z8Qw&ab_channel=Roter...
- TeMPOraL 4y agoYes, that's the song! I mistakenly took the album name to be the song title. Thanks for correcting. Now that I got to listen to it again, I can recommend everyone to here to check it out. The lyrics are pretty much an artistic interpretation of any of the almost daily HN threads on surveillance and digital dystopia.
- hnlmorg 4y agoIt’s the bank declining. Banks have a lot of heuristics to check for stolen cards. This could easily have been flagged up as unusual. But even if it wasn’t that, a lot of banks will have a daily total limit for contactless payments without the card PIN number being entered. Such limits are reset the following day or when the card is used in a chip and pin reader (whichever happens first). It’s very common for people in the U.K. to use a debit card for all transactions because the banking system is so robust (thus we don’t need to rely on getting a credit card statement and then marking off legitimate spend, as seems to be the norm in the US). So while the declined transaction might seem archaic on the surface, it’s actually part of a greater whole.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 4y agocredit card purchases are viewable online instantly in the US. i get an SMS and email every time i or my wife charges the card. and it's on autopay. and i get 2% cash back. win win.
- deergomoo 4y ago> But even if it wasn’t that, a lot of banks will have a daily total limit for contactless payments without the card PIN number being entered Interestingly there seems to be no consistent way in how device payments are treated. For example, some card readers apply the £100 contactless limit for Apple/Google Pay while many are unlimited. I always assumed that the verification required for device payments made them “as good as” Chip and PIN—for example I never have to do additional verification for purchases using Apple Pay on the web, regardless of the amount.