Peterborough - Possibly had my Card Scammed (1 Viewer)

[Jim]

Jim was the ATM you used up near the Campers shop?

Yes, the one in the room next to the shop. As ever I had a really good look at the machine before I used it. That said, I used it on the Thursday, only ralliers in then, public not in till Friday.

 

[golly]

The only time my card has been compromised was after I used it at Newark show a couple of years ago, now I only use cash at this sort of event.

 

[PhilG]

if only there was some other way to pay for things.. maybe some round tokens , or perhaps some kind of universal IOU note that was accepted everywhere.

The whole 'contactless' thing is a waste of time , whether you put it in the machine, or just waft it over the top of it , data is still being sent.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Langtoftlad]

And on TV last week it showed how someone with a reader ( sorry font know the technical names) could watch you paying for something then bumping into you ( knowing where you put your card) and getting all the card details.

I'm not entirely convinced that works...
...but just in case it does, I keep my cards in a RFID blocking wallet.

 

[MillieMoocher]

Many thanks to @canopus for posting this information. I don't check my bank account that frequently so had there been a problem it might have been a couple of weeks before I saw anything was wrong.

Have been on and all is well, apart from seeing just how much I did spend on stuff at the show...

 

[DBK]

if only there was some other way to pay for things.. maybe some round tokens , or perhaps some kind of universal IOU note that was accepted everywhere.

Not sure if that is tongue in cheek because what you describe already exists, it's called cash.

On reflection I think you knew that and I'm being dim, not unusual!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[DuxDeluxe]

The only time my card has been compromised was after I used it at Newark show a couple of years ago, now I only use cash at this sort of event.

I always get cash out prior to the show and take cash only. The only problem is that I was gassed last time and robbed of all my cash (about £2000) and my iPad ............but they left the Rolex

 

[kip]

My card was compromised last year in of all places fatima ,.Have to say Barclays were very good ! we were not aware of any issues until we got back home.A letter on the mat told us to phone their fraud dept who explained that a small transaction of 0.67 euros had been activated & then a much larger one of 600 usd ( to florida i think) Anyway this obviously alerted them & they cancelled both transactions immediately.I used the same machine at peterborough on fri ,just checked our balance & all seems ok.I now always cover my pin entry & check who`s standing behind me. A quick look over your shoulder will always let someone know that you are aware.Best to be safe than sorry.

 

[GJH]

Having spent a long time in Fraud Prevention, I can assure Funsters that the banks do take it seriously but, its a never ending battle.

Real time transaction fraud is being prevented after a huge investment in technology.
Application Fraud has been a long hard slog.

But there are some really dumb customers and a small number of bent staff, how do you prevent that?

I think the point is that they take some of it seriously but not all. Where the cost is "only" customer inconvenience and/or the cost can be charged to another party they don't take it seriously. From what they said in their correspondence with me they know very well that one of the major sources of fraud comes from the use of generated long card numbers used for transactions without either PIN or CVV. They also know that they could stop all those frauds by insisting that all retailers use either PIN or CVV because that would reject any transaction using only a generated long number. The reason that they don't is that it would upset their big customers - and that is more important than the upset to smaller customers in terms of their throughput and profits.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

but they left the Rolex

Only because it was clamped to your A frame.

 

[ShiftZZ]

There are always victims in Fraud, not only the banks but small merchants who may have parted with the goods or services.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

And on TV last week it showed how someone with a reader ( sorry font know the technical names) could watch you paying for something then bumping into you ( knowing where you put your card) and getting all the card details.

We covered that a few weeks ago. Yes, if someone had a machine they could in theory do that but they wouldn't be able to get a machine in the first place - you can't just buy one somewhere and make it send payments to a normal bank account. There is far far more to it than that - you need three separate accounts in place and the security checks on one of them are far more than are required for a normal bank account.

If anyone was stupid enough to obtain a machine legitimately and then try something like that they would be caught in about 10 minutes.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

There are always victims in Fraud, not only the banks but small merchants who may have parted with the goods or services.

Yes, and the small merchants can probably least afford it. That is another reason why it's annoying that the card issuers don't close the open door they have allowed

 

[CeeJay13]

At the end of the day, any 'losses' the Banks make through scams will be paid for by their Customers. Why should they care? Never mind the angst and trauma that the Victim has to go through to get their money back.

Unfortunately, as long as the Banks can maintain their profits, there is no real incentive to change the system, especially as the inherently faulty Chip and Pin was aggressively advertised as being supposed to stop these scams.

Having been through 'the mill' myself (supposedly had a fantastic couple of weeks in the South of France), I fell sorry for people that this happens to.

 

[Khizzie]

I'm not entirely convinced that works...
...but just in case it does, I keep my cards in a RFID blocking wallet.

So do I,just in case .

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GWAYGWAY]

I really did not like paying £60 to park in a mud hollow by the A1. I did sneak out on Saturday night and got lost then in the morning found myself right beside the Funsters noise machine, I was wondering how I got there , I was trying to get out so it must have been closer to the gateway and I didn't find it until the Sunday morning. Funny that!

 

[Steve]

14/04/2016 CASH WITHDRAWAL AT INFOCASH LTD ATM DCATM EAST OF E, PETERBOROUGH,81.75 GBP , ON 14-04-201.
I used the very same cash m/c. I will keep a close eye on my account.
Thanks for the heads up.

 

[ShiftZZ]

At the end of the day, any 'losses' the Banks make through scams will be paid for by their Customers. Why should they care? Never mind the angst and trauma that the Victim has to go through to get their money back.

Unfortunately, as long as the Banks can maintain their profits, there is no real incentive to change the system, especially as the inherently faulty Chip and Pin was aggressively advertised as being supposed to stop these scams.

Having been through 'the mill' myself (supposedly had a fantastic couple of weeks in the South of France), I fell sorry for people that this happens to.

You are entitled to that opinion, but, the reality is far different, Banks do care and are passionate about fraud prevention and avoidance, they spend a fortune on technology to identfy and prevent fraud. I know as I was part of the system that was charged with preventing it. I was part of the development team for both Hunter and Detect (local and National), and consulted on by SIRA from Synectic Solutions, NetReveal, SAS, SearchSpace, Falcon and other solutions, including I2 etc.

Its the only part of the Fincancial Services that is non competative, and the sharing of data and technology is the norm.

When I worked for Experian Fraud Solutions, the biggest issue was their reputation and they would go the extra mile to mitigate as many risks as they could.

Staff , managers and depatments are given targets to reduce fraud and any fraud that hits the press gets a high priority.

We even undetook large trawling of staff data to find rogue staff and would not hessitate in taking them out.
Fraud preventions costs the business and the overall Fraud Costs are cross charged to each product, whch affects their profitability, also Bad Debt s included in the costs.
All Fraude departments are audited by CIFAS on a regular basis and if they fail or fall short there are severe sanctions. Membership of CIFAS 10 years ago was in the £80k pa .

"Never mind the angst and trauma that the Victim has to go through to get their money back.", from what I have read, the OP Ken got his money back pronto..

To say that the banks dont care is simply wrong and Ill-informed.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Carol]

Thank you @canopus we used that cash machine and as we are on our way up to the North Coast 500 Road may not have been able to check with the internet, (as we used that machine) but we used it on the Thursday and all seems well but we will keep an eye on it For the heads up.

 

[DuxDeluxe]

Only because it was clamped to your A frame.

Forensic examination showed evidence of pie contamination.........


.......it was a Chinese knock off anyway

 

[CeeJay13]

@ShiftZZ. Thank you for the correction, I can only comment from what I know of modern technology and what we see in the papers. I know that the actual precautions taken will be kept from us for security reasons. But at the end of the day, this fraud cost Billions and someone has to pay. What upsets me is that we seem to have to prove to the banks that we didn't do it, despite the spending being way outside our normal pattern. I know, what used to be called 'fuzzy logic', probably now 'heuristic algorithms' are the bees knees.

I am really glad that the OP did get his money back quickly.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what you are saying, and you have been far closer to the problem than I have ever been, so I have learnt something today and I thank you for that. Consider me informed.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[ShiftZZ]

@ShiftZZ. Thank you for the correction, I can only comment from what I know of modern technology and what we see in the papers. I know that the actual precautions taken will be kept from us for security reasons. But at the end of the day, this fraud cost Billions and someone has to pay. What upsets me is that we seem to have to prove to the banks that we didn't do it, despite the spending being way outside our normal pattern. I know, what used to be called 'fuzzy logic', probably now 'heuristic algorithms' are the bees knees.

I am really glad that the OP did get his money back quickly.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what you are saying, and you have been far closer to the problem than I have ever been, so I have learnt something today and I thank you for that. Consider me informed.

Proving that the fraud was not yours is fine. But there is a large number of cases where the PIN number and card have been 'given' to a member of the family, some idiots have even written the PIN number on the back of the card..

I remember a case where a customer stated that he had not used the card, we looked at the spending and the ATM withdrawal’s and the procedure was to look at the ATM output, two before and two after the victims card had been used. In one case I rang the 'victim' and asked his to ask his wife who was using his card standing in front of her at the ATM.

1st party fraud is also an issue, where the customer denies using the card , but, evidence produced confirms that the purchases were his/hers. The best example was a Catholic Priest who insisted that the purchases on his account were fraudulent, they were all made in Amsterdam, we charged the items back to the Dutch bank, who investigated and sent us photographs of the fraudster, we then contacted the 'victim' and suggested that he may wish to have a look at the photographs of HIM in a brothel in Amsterdam. He paid...


A case in the Far East some time ago, pre Chip & Pin, a merchant was offering goods very cheap, purchases would be made, at 1/10th the real cost. The 'voucher' was never processed as all the fraudster wanted was the card details etc., true to form the accounts were attacked and as no voucher had been processed we could not identify the point of compromise. Therefore we lost..


My biggest hit was £120k on one card overnight all from the Far East.
Cheques £1.2M on one account over a Xmas period, major Airline.


Bad staff is a problem, and yes I have authorised covert cctv and keyloggers to identify who was doing what. Nat West have/had a team of investigators on the road 5 days a week interviewing staff who had accessed VIP accounts. I sent a team to India to investigate Indian Call centre staff downloading and selling data/


Over the year I built up a network of contacts, banks, insurance etc etc , and law enforcement both UK and overseas and yes stuff was shared and fraud prevented.


The cost of real time transactional fraud prevention is mind blowing, as is the output, remember its 24*7 - 365 with the staff to action the output, the costs are huge and return small, in money terms. The biggest payback is the reputational benefits. Both customer and 'street cred' against the fraudsters a sort of 'don’t mess with company X as they have X y z...


Yes is a continual battle and one that can’t be won, I'm glad I'm out of it, one slip can cost a fortune, Google Cotton Traders Hack. That cost 1 bank £1m and two or three senior managers their job.


Fraud departments are always on the lookout for new solutions, the biggest problem is convincing those in charge of the budget that the 'solution; will pay dividends, as you can’t test the system in real time...


Fraud will not go away, look at Benefit Fraud about £2B pa, even if you are caught, the chances of going to prison are small, less than 2%.

Bank Fraud in the main is driven by specific ethnic groups, ATM (eastern European), POS (Indian sub-continent) Transactional (East Africa) 3rd Party Fraud a mixture.

Note, when you go to any restaurant, and they don’t accept cards, ask yourself why?


I'm off to watch TV...

 

[jezport]

[QUOTE="The common thing was they'd all purchased items at stands using their cards. The stands owners all used a wifi connection for their card machines and it was thought that the info on the cards was stolen because it was wifi.
[/QUOTE]

The card terminals do not use wifi they use the GSM phone system so are secure. A lot more secure than when you speak your details over the phone or enter them on many websites.

 

[Jim]

The card terminals do not use wifi they use the GSM phone system so are secure.

I agree, of all parts of the process, I do not think the terminals are the culprit. 3 and 4g are among the most secure connections.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

You are entitled to that opinion, but, the reality is far different, Banks do care and are passionate about fraud prevention and avoidance, they spend a fortune on technology to identfy and prevent fraud. I know as I was part of the system that was charged with preventing it. I was part of the development team for both Hunter and Detect (local and National), and consulted on by SIRA from Synectic Solutions, NetReveal, SAS, SearchSpace, Falcon and other solutions, including I2 etc.

Its the only part of the Fincancial Services that is non competative, and the sharing of data and technology is the norm.

When I worked for Experian Fraud Solutions, the biggest issue was their reputation and they would go the extra mile to mitigate as many risks as they could.

Staff , managers and depatments are given targets to reduce fraud and any fraud that hits the press gets a high priority.

We even undetook large trawling of staff data to find rogue staff and would not hessitate in taking them out.
Fraud preventions costs the business and the overall Fraud Costs are cross charged to each product, whch affects their profitability, also Bad Debt s included in the costs.
All Fraude departments are audited by CIFAS on a regular basis and if they fail or fall short there are severe sanctions. Membership of CIFAS 10 years ago was in the £80k pa .

"Never mind the angst and trauma that the Victim has to go through to get their money back.", from what I have read, the OP Ken got his money back pronto..

To say that the banks dont care is simply wrong and Ill-informed.

I think we all appreciate that the card issuers care about some fraud and don't deny the amount of resource that goes into combating it. The problem is the word some though. The Payments Council/UK Cards Association admitted to me that they are well aware of the frauds which result from their deliberate bypassing of security procedures, frauds which they know they could prevent if they wanted to. They simply think that so long as the customer gets his money back then everything is hunky dory. They definitely don't care about the inconvenience to the customer, whatever the cost associated with that.

 

[GJH]

Forensic examination showed evidence of pie contamination.........


.......it was a Chinese knock off anyway

Contaminated by a Chinese pie? Not quite as bad as a Cornish pasty from Essex then eh?

 

[DuxDeluxe]

Contaminated by a Chinese pie? Not quite as bad as a Cornish pasty from Essex then eh?

Duck DNA found......these Chinese put anything into their food

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[ShiftZZ]

On a regular basis all fraud reporting would go to the banks board and they would often request solutions and reduction strategy.
Any large fraud would trigger an incident report and that would be referred to the CEO and the executive responsible and product owner. They would try and migrate 'non preventable fraud' to 'preventable fraud' thus making as much fraud to be accountable and failure a sackable action.

I wouldn't normally have shared as much information, but I get rather angry when something I devoted a large part of my working life is dismissed. The vast majority of the staff I employed always went the extra mile for me and the victims of fraud. Even after having left 10 years ago they still keep in touch. I am proud of each one of them, even the one who works for the inland revenue in NZ.

Rant over.

 

[Barclaybasher]

To say that the banks dont care is simply wrong and Ill-informed.

 

[DuxDeluxe]

On a regular basis all fraud reporting would go to the banks board and they would often request solutions and reduction strategy.
Any large fraud would trigger an incident report and that would be referred to the CEO and the executive responsible and product owner. They would try and migrate 'non preventable fraud' to 'preventable fraud' thus making as much fraud to be accountable and failure a sackable action.

I wouldn't normally have shared as much information, but I get rather angry when something I devoted a large part of my working life is dismissed. The vast majority of the staff I employed always went the extra mile for me and the victims of fraud. Even after having left 10 years ago they still keep in touch. I am proud of each one of them, even the one who works for the inland revenue in NZ.

Rant over.

That was a good informative reply, rather than a rant
As with anything detrimental it needs to be covered by a risk management strategy and plan, knowing that zero is a great target but unachievable. Compare it a little with H&S - zero events is achievable by not employing any people and doing nothing at all work related. No business in other words. Not going to happen, so the next best thing is to minimise risk, which is what the banks are doing. Whatever they do, they can't win in everyone's eyes

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}