who pays in an unsolved fraud?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is the company that took the payment that ulitimately has to pay. I work for a large insurance company and have to deal with unauthorized payments from time to time. This is how we deal with it.

The card holder usually calls us to inform that our company charged their card but they are not affiliated with us. We have the customer dispute this as an unauthorized charge their credit card company. The credit card company turns around and disputes this charge with us. We refund the money and the credit card company credits the card. We attempt to find the unautorized user, which is easier for an insurace company as all payments are connected to an insurance policy. Since we have a policy for the unauthorized payment, we remove the funds from that policy number and bill that person. A retail establishment would take it as a loss as they cant really track down the unauthorized users. However, most major retailers now have a "blacklist" of disputed cards. When someone attempts to use a card that has previously been used in a dispute it would be declined (further proof that the company is the one that pays).
 
It's the credit card company. If the fraud is HUGE, they will investigate it. As in something that's like 100K. Otherwise, they'll just write it off. A dad of a friend of mine has a card that is more than $10K - which was used to buy stuff online by some thieves. The credit card company completely wrote it off and cleared his account.

EDIT:

Just read evelmunkey's post. Different ppl do different things? Either way, the important thing for u as a consumer is that you don't have to pay urself.
 
evelmunkey said:
It is the company that took the payment that ulitimately has to pay. I work for a large insurance company and have to deal with unauthorized payments from time to time. This is how we deal with it.

Pretty much. We had our fair share of credit card fraud too. The banks and credit card companies then leave it up to the merchant to chase up the culprit.

And this can be rather time consuming. The police will only want to hear about it if they got some solid lead to go on.
And interpol will only want to get involved if the amount is large. Eg. US$20 000 and over.

And even after the crook has been caught, it up to the slow wheels of justice to turn.

12 months, we had a some guy get away with 2 notebooks. The bank hit up us up for the amount taken in the transaction.
The stupid idiot desided that he was going to purchase another 2 more notebooks, so between the NSW Police and Interpol (which took a lot of hurrassing), we managed to set up a sting operation.
So we told this guy that he processed his payment. And then sent a parcel of dead computer bits to this guy in South Africa.
After that, interpol was waiting for this guy down at the customes office.
6 months ago, we managed to get one of the notebooks back.
Rescently, it turns out that this guy has been trailed and thrown in jail. So now it just a matter of waiting for Interpol to giving us the remaining money back, which they managed to seise.

Law said:
I think the problem is bigger when your credit card information is stolen not the card it self. Therefore it's really hard to tell if someone knows your information than having it stolen.
Hence the reason why I look at every back statement like a hawk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom