Menu
Posted: Aug 24, 2016
Categories: Debit Cards, Fraud
Comments: 0

Thoughts on the Good News and Bad News for Credit Unions

When a debit card number is counterfeited, like what happens in a breach of data from a merchant, any counterfeit card number usage results in withdrawals directly from the cardholder’s bank account. Even though the cardholder’s liability for fraudulent transaction is limited - under the FCBA, liability for unauthorized use of the card tops out at $50 and many issuers have a $0 liability for fraud - there also can be additional costs and fees as a result. Checks that bounce result in NSF charges or scheduled bill pays that fail and incur late fees are just some of the aggravations that debit cardholders whose cards were caught in one of the many highly publicized data breaches had to deal with.

Read more
Posted: Jul 22, 2016
Comments: 0

A follow up to previous TPR article on this topic

Fraud continues to be the number one reason why a cardholder moves a card from top of wallet. And fraud isn’t cheap, costing the issuer in liability for the fraudulent charges plus the cost of reissue.  Additionally, there is the potential of lost revenue from the card being moved from the number one position in the cardholder’s wallet.

A previous thought leadership article on ThePaymentsReview.com introduced the concept of putting the cardholder in the middle of the transaction, meaning enlist the cardholder to take ownership of monitoring card purchases and respond quickly to potential fraud.

A shining example of success implementing this strategy took place over the 4th of July weekend. FIS, CSCU’s processing partner and international provider of financial services technology and outsourcing services, rolled out a new product, SecurLOCK Communicate.  The product alerts credit and debit cardholders of potential fraud in real time via a two-way interactive text message (SMS), or a voice call, or an email.

Read more
Posted: Jul 12, 2016
Comments: 0
Author: Barney Moore

Chargebacks to merchants have become a hot topic of late. And for good reason. According to a recent report by First Annapolis Consulting, chargebacks for card-present transactions increased 50% following the October 1 EMV liability shift.  While this took merchants by surprise, it did not surprise issuers who, until the October 2015 liability shift for chip cards processed at card-present non-chip terminals, were absorbing the cost of fraud for counterfeit cards. Now issuers are allowed to chargeback, or pass back the fraud to the merchants who were not processing chip cards.

Read more
Posted: Jul 5, 2016
Comments: 0
Author: Lou Grilli

Following the switch to EMV chip cards last October, merchants that implemented chip card readers at the check-out lanes noticed something besides the initial confusion – that the time to process a transaction was taking much longer versus a simple card swipe. The time varied greatly by terminal type, but a study carried out by JDA Software Group claimed that it took an extra 8 – 12 seconds per checkout. In the retail world, those are precious seconds that can drive cost for extra labor to open additional check-out lanes.

Read more
Posted: May 31, 2016
Comments: 0
Author: Bill Lehman

There was a time when a bank or credit union did not talk about fraud to their cardholders. They did not want to give the impression that their financial institution might be susceptible. The only mention was when describing the benefits of using the Visa or MasterCard brand which carries zero liability to the cardholder in case of fraud. But those days of silence on the subject are long in the past. Consumers are leery of identity theft, have started to look closely at their statements and, have learned the need to keep their social security numbers private.

 


 

Read more
RSS
12345678

search

Featured Stories