|
Originally Posted by JEFFJAGUAR
(Post 22368556)
It's hard to generalize this and indeed some of it in a way is cultural. For example, maybe I'm an exception, but I have rarely encountered this scam in France. Perhaps it dates back to the time the French really wanted everybody to accept their culture and part of it was you paid in (French) francs. (Of course it's the euro now). The home and birthplace of this scam was Ireland (the Republic of). For years, they never asked and if you complained after the fqact, they had some lies ready for you. ("It's a good rate set by the Bank of Ireland. Besides you may not know your bank charges a fee for currency conversion." (Mine doesn't and of course it's a foreign transaction fee anyway). "The amount in your currency is just shown as an approximation' the transaction is being done in punts (the pre euro currency)." Or, "we have no control over it. The terminal does it automatically." Heard all of them in my arguments with merchants which was always followed by from me, "Please bring the manager." Of course, in Ireland I never heard, "No comprende Ingles" or something to that effect. Today, and I've seen this in operation say at Blarney Castle mall they do ask but they urge you the better choice is your currency. ("you lock in the rate." Like the rate ever changes in a single day by 5% but to be fair, when you say euro, that's the end of the story. They run the transaction properly.
It's a growing problem in London. Many of the rip off theatre agencies which pretend to be the official half price theatre agency on the walk from the underground station on Charing Cross Road to Leicester Square pull this automatically and claim its part of the deal to get the 1/2 (which is more than the official Leicester Square TKTS booth charges). Spain is getting bad (elcortes ingles a prime example). Italy is getting bad (but never been pulled on my at an Autogrill). Holland and Germany loathe credit cards as it is. For years, of course, in the so called Eastern bloc before 1989, transactions were often required by law to be done in wetern currency (the way these cash starved countries loaded up on convertible currency and it was legally required). So as I said, it's hard to generalize. And let's not forget the many unscrupulous merchants in the USA who pull this sruff on foreign visitors to the USA!
Originally Posted by percysmith
(Post 22368568)
Hong Kong - I don't think so
DCCing a FT Ambassador http://www.hongkongcard.com/webedito...1125_22974.jpg Korea - DCC rollout is fairly limited. Japan's just started http://www.hongkongcard.com/forum/fo...p?id=3939&p=17 #168 Hope (really hope) this is true to your experience of HK, percysmith, as you live there and can be more accurate on this. And hope Japan's DCC can be as law-abiding as Korea's - asking before choosing. |
Originally Posted by zyxlsy
(Post 22369407)
Never knew DCC can be done in US. All I've been facing is being converted from other currencies to USD...
Hope (really hope) this is true to your experience of HK, percysmith, as you live there and can be more accurate on this. And hope Japan's DCC can be as law-abiding as Korea's - asking before choosing. |
Hotel Arts receipt from 17 February 2014:
http://i.imgur.com/awi4kGHt.jpg I was able to check out of Hotel Arts and avoid the DCC scam Monday morning. I was worried based on my recent experience at hotels in Europe trying to sneak in DCC, but yesterday morning I didn't have any problems. I specified that I wanted to be charged in euros, and the DCC free slip printed for me to sign. Their computer seems to be integrated with the POS terminal because the folio printout had the same transaction ID as the thermal paper receipt, which I embedded in the upper left. You can see the line about DCC as an option: For your convenience you are able to settle your bill in the currency of your credit card. Should you wish to settle your bill in your local currency (not in EUR), please note that a 2% conversion rate mark-up from the bank is already included in the final amount. All exchange rates are sourced from Banco Santander. At least they're honest about the mark-up, so it would be 2% above what Santander's rate is. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume their exchange rate is competitive, but why would you want to be 2% more just to be offered the convenience of being billed in your local currency? |
Originally Posted by Majuki
(Post 22370071)
At least they're honest about the mark-up, so it would be 2% above what Santander's rate is. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume their exchange rate is competitive, but why would you want to be 2% more just to be offered the convenience of being billed in your local currency?
Bank of China too complies with this requirement, it would be like you don't get arrested for robbery if you tell the victim they're gonna get robbed in advance. |
Originally Posted by moondog
(Post 22369510)
Non-compliant DCC isn't an unlawful practice; it's simply prohibited by Visa/MC. .
They certainly aren't able to anything about the Bank of Chinas and Bankcomms of this world. All we can say is that they are non-compliant with Visa merchant and acquirer agreements and/or VIOR. But there is no consequence. Or even Visa/MC don't want to cut them off (at least acquire the merchant interchange part of the income). |
...but in theory, mc/visa can prohibit them from continuing to take their cards. Note I said in theory. The odds of that happening are, of course, either none or non existant. It's the same as Capital One telling you that you don't need a card with emv chip since all merchants are required by visa (or mc) to accept any valid card. Right. Next time a kiosk refuses to perform a transacton, I'll be sure to report them. Wonder what will happen.
|
Originally Posted by JEFFJAGUAR
(Post 22371913)
...but in theory, mc/visa can prohibit them from continuing to take their cards. Note I said in theory. The odds of that happening are, of course, either none or non existant. It's the same as Capital One telling you that you don't need a card with emv chip since all merchants are required by visa (or mc) to accept any valid card. Right. Next time a kiosk refuses to perform a transacton, I'll be sure to report them. Wonder what will happen.
|
Originally Posted by reclusive46
(Post 22372314)
I haven't seen any merchants being banned for this but I can think of two examples locally to be me where a card network has banned a merchant.
I'm talking about what really happened in that case, not everyone making fun of the situation because someone got a bunch of money for spilling coffee. The lady kindly asked McDonald's to pay her (few thousand dollars, iirc) medical bills, and McDonald's told her to go pound sand. When she took the case to court asking only for compensatory damages, the jury awarded punitive damages. A similar award could force a behavior change and at least end the deceptive practices. I would have no problem if DCC were really a conscious choice with all of the information clearly presented to the customer. *Note: I am typically not in favor of these cases as they're usually a net loss for both parties. |
Originally Posted by Majuki
(Post 22372715)
Not that it would necessarily help in the rest of the world, but I think such an issue would be ripe for a class action lawsuit in the US.* Just think of the McDonald's coffee spill case.
|
They do tie in in a way since if you're moronic enough to use a bank charging a foreign transaction fee, if you fall for the dcc scam, you're hit twice. First by the credit card processor (or the merchant) in using a rate above the interbank rate by as much as 5% and then the near criminal bank imposing a foreign transaction fee of 3%.
Now it really is a sticky wicket for the banks because one of the arguments of the credit card processors carrying out dcc is that it is necessary because mc/visa do indeed charge a 1% surcharge on the interbank rate for currency conversion and they and the merchants have a right to a piece of this action which is what dcc does. Besides, so they argue, if there weren't foreign transaction fees but only foreign currency conversion fees, it would all shake out pretty much the same in the end namely the credit card processor and by extension the merchant getting a share of the revenue from foreign currency conversion fees which the credit card banks (and mc/visa) keep for themselves. So, they argued, the banks had an unfair advantage and they were only attempting via dcc to even the playing field. Officially, MC/visa claim they are opposed to dcc but because of litigation arguing what I just wrote above, they are forced to allow it. The credit card processors argue, naturally, that it is the banks who are ripping off their customers with foreign transaction fees and that if these didn't exist, the profits involved in foreign currency transactions could be more fairly shared by the banks, the credit card processors and the merchants. In other words, they say, don't blame us. We're entitled to a piece of this action. It's the banks that are the rip off agents. |
Originally Posted by JEFFJAGUAR
(Post 22374976)
The credit card processors argue, naturally, that it is the banks who are ripping off their customers with foreign transaction fees and that if these didn't exist, the profits involved in foreign currency transactions could be more fairly shared by the banks, the credit card processors and the merchants. In other words, they say, don't blame us. We're entitled to a piece of this action. It's the banks that are the rip off agents.
If a merchant provided DCC with competitive exchange rates that were disclosed up front, it would be a different story. Of course, they won't, because for every one customer who will compare exchange rates and choose a button to press, there will be ten that fall for the "convenience of being billed in your own currency" argument, and merchants will do what yields the most profit. |
Originally Posted by JEFFJAGUAR
(Post 22374976)
Now it really is a sticky wicket for the banks because one of the arguments of the credit card processors carrying out dcc is that it is necessary because mc/visa do indeed charge a 1% surcharge on the interbank rate for currency conversion and they and the merchants have a right to a piece of this action which is what dcc does.
Visa doesn't, but we have banks (Dah Sing) who imposes the fee on Visas as well even though none is charged by Visa Inc (so in reality that fee becomea a bank-collected fee). If (MC at least) wants to claim antitrust protection by allowing DCC, they should not be allowed to collect the 0.8% foreign transactions fee. That's just like saying you can shop elsewhere but we'll still be allowed to collect the price difference if you find the same service for cheaper. |
Originally Posted by JEFFJAGUAR
(Post 22374976)
They do tie in in a way since if you're moronic enough to use a bank charging a foreign transaction fee, if you fall for the dcc scam, you're hit twice.
DCC has been adequately disclosed since its inception (possibly in part to preempt a repeat of CCF). |
Originally Posted by moondog
(Post 22375444)
The judgement against the defendants in the CCF case had nothing to do with the fees themselves, but with the fact that they were not properly disclosed. The fees continue to get charged, but now card issuing banks tell you this in advance.
DCC has been adequately disclosed since its inception (possibly in part to preempt a repeat of CCF). |
Originally Posted by moondog
(Post 22369510)
Non-compliant DCC isn't an unlawful practice; it's simply prohibited by Visa/MC.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:39 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.