The solution to "Fraud Freaking"
 

This applies to fraud freaking in general, and how the Banks are doing it wrong. It's exactly on topic but it relates closely to MS, for example trying to buy a typical quantity of beans as a certain drugstore, and fraud freaking during said process.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's called "Fraud Freak" it happened to me twice today, for transactions that were each less than 7% of my gross monthly pay.

And quite frankly, it's getting on my @#$% nerves.

I really don't want to have to worry every time I present my card for anything over a certain amount. So therefore...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit Card Industry, behold as I solve your problem for you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Chip and PIN. USA, for God's sake just do it already! You're making us look like a luddite in front of the whole world. 2015 yeah yeah I'll believe it when I see it. This really cannot come soon enough. I mean, even North Korea has it. Are you not the slightest bit embarrassed by that?

2. The transaction should NOT be straight up declined. It has obviously never occurred to anyone that there could certainly be an option other than "Declined" which should be reserved exclusively for accounts not in good standing or with insufficient funds. Rather, registers should say "Transaction Verification Required" upon which the cardholder replies to a "Yes, it was me" SMS and shows their driver's license (or whatever challenge response protocol is developed). It won't inconvenience others waiting in line any more than a decline fiasco. Everyone has cell phones and government issued ID's, USE THEM.

3. Universal Bank notifier app for travel. Allow, with user-approval, a GPS pull then a brief secondary challenge-response or soft-token digits. For non smartphone owners put a website, they can register their travel with all banks at once rather than dialing several 800#'s and dealing with endless menu-tree nonsense. I'm surprised some kale juice drinking Bay Area startup yuppies (sorry, young professionals) haven't gotten some VC $$ for this already.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyhoo,

Bottom line: If card holders are in good standing and have sufficient funds, under NO circumstances should they be denied access to their funds when they are requested. Banks should NOT throw customers under the bus under the guise of looking out for them. It is the banks' responsibility to ensure the transaction gets through for their customer without declining it, if the suspicious transaction can be validated non-fraudulent, which the banks should in good faith attempt to do PRIOR to declining the charge, and they need to work with merchants on ways to make this happen. I believe THIS to be the true consumer protection issue. Fraud prevention is a BANK protection issue, nothing more.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, I may get snark for this, but it puts the ideas out there. If there is a highly trafficked credit card blog out there where this would be more appropriate, I'm all ears.

You're asking a lot of innovation (from some very "mature" companies) that really won't make them much/any money. Other than Chip&PIN, that will happen eventually. I believe 2015 is only Chip&Sig.

To your 2nd point, I don't even see the point. Some banks already send SMS to verify suspicious transactions (yes, after declining). A quick response and re-swipe and you're golden. Instead you want to lock up the terminal in a verification status while the bank sends an SMS to you? How long should we all wait on you to respond to your SMS? What if you're in a concrete jungle with no signal? Seems like even at best, it's more interruption to the people in line behind you.

On your 3rd point, there are myriad issues. Namely security and the fact that credit card issuers are in a competitive market and not trying to join forces to make it easier to play them all at once. And why hasn't a kale-drinking yuppie come up with the idea? Look around - those kale-drinking yuppies are trying to circumvent the banks, not make them more competitive.

On point 2, look, people don't like to get declined. It's embarrassing, and it's especially infuriating when you know you're in good standing. One time, I even called BofA ahead of time in front of a friend while at a store because I knew they would fraud/decline, 15 minutes and 3 different reps, they said I was ok, and man if it didn't decline at the register anyway. Yes, in front of my friend. There's always the sneaking assumption when that happens that someone is a financial mess; and it is simply not fair to humiliate a customer like that if there's nothing actually wrong with their account.

too easy

so you spent 15 minutes on the phone before getting a fraud alert to save face....curious why it took 3 reps and 15 minutes but ok. Anyway, they can be cleared typically in a few seconds and I personally could care less what others think about me:p

since when has the banking industry cared about innovating or their customers? (unless it's innovating new ways to rip off their customers.)

Which is why I said it was a consumer protection issue.

I spent 15 minutes on the phone so my purchase would go through, which they still managed to bungle. And anyone who says they don't care at all what others think about them is deluded.

Bring it.

Depends on the issuer, some male you jump through many hoops and return phone calls before they clear the block.

The 2015 deadline is for the Chip. It's up the issuer whether they adopt Chip and Sig or PIN.

I partially agree as this happened to me recently on two diff CCs that have a bit of age and quite a bit of usage on em. Only tried the second card (from the same issuing bank) because the first one was declined. They dont have to monitor us via GPS but considering they are location aware, and this store was literally 2 miles from my house and within a 5 mile radius of where I do most of my shopping/spending -- there is absolutely no reason for auto-decline.

Just ridiculous and bizarre -- esp for an acct in good standing, with no issues whatsoever. I understand the precautions they or rather the computer or rather the dolt who programmed the algorithm takes but like the OP mentioned a quick option for verification of ID/name on card by the cashier could easily solve the issue. So any given POS terminal should have the ability to send a popup msg like that.

I don't agree with any of this nonsense from the OP. Any industry change that makes things "safer" has the likelihood of lower risk for the banks and thus pushing down reward rates. (Note: I could be wrong here and CCC could pass along the lower risk in the form of higher rewards)

Chip and pin will likely result in legislation/regulation that pushes payment processing for CC's closer to debit card rates which is not good for our world.

It doesn't bother me. It is rare that I get a fraud notification, it only takes a minute of my time to clear. I just say "Sorry, my card was declined for possible fraud" and rectify the situation.

When you look at it from a business perspective:

This issue causes billions of dollars in losses to issuers and merchants. That isn't chump change. And in the end, most of the cost of those losses ends up getting passed on to you, me, and merchants. Higher swipe fees and interest rates, smaller incentive bonuses, etc.

If getting inconvenienced for three minutes each year helps prevent some measurable amount of fraud, then I'm all for it.

I had that happen with my citi card. I called and they said you are good to go. As soon as I swiped they declined and fraud alert. I called right away and he cleared it and stayed on the call till I swiped again. I find it annoying but not embarrassing. I guess I would rather be safe than sorry.