Chip and Pin Card from Capital One
Apr 28th, 2015, 10:25 PM
#41
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kia...not quite true. There are some cases reported where the cash advance pin and every credit card has a cash advance pin which in some cases does have to be requested, will activate a purchase but not many. And csr's tell customers in some cases if you use the cash advance pin, the transaction will go through as a cash advance. Again not true.
However, as I've tried to show, it doesn't matter. Don't waste any time looking for a true chip and pin cad from a US bank. There are almost none available. And it really doesn't matter. In the USA hardly no merchant today takes a chip card (Walmart does but just about nobody else). And as it stands today, no matter what some naysayers claim, the chip and signature cards will work, even in unattended kiosks 99.9% of the time and that number is rising
However, as I've tried to show, it doesn't matter. Don't waste any time looking for a true chip and pin cad from a US bank. There are almost none available. And it really doesn't matter. In the USA hardly no merchant today takes a chip card (Walmart does but just about nobody else). And as it stands today, no matter what some naysayers claim, the chip and signature cards will work, even in unattended kiosks 99.9% of the time and that number is rising
Apr 28th, 2015, 10:56 PM
#43
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 23,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, xyz, it seems that you are providing information that SUPPORTS what I said, namely, "many ... Chip and Signature cards have PINs that can NEVER be used to authorize a payment." If you are disputing that statement, then respectfully, you are not being sufficiently clear for those of us who are bank-card dummies.
And in context, your statements, "Don't waste any time looking for a true chip and pin cad from a US bank. There are almost none available. And it really doesn't matter." are, I think, potentially misleading. While it may be a waste of time to look for true chip & PINS from a US <b><u>bank</b></u>, some are available from US <b><u>credit unions</b></u>. And, for some purposes, whether your card is a true Chip & PIN or not can matter a <b><u>great deal</b></u>!
And in context, your statements, "Don't waste any time looking for a true chip and pin cad from a US bank. There are almost none available. And it really doesn't matter." are, I think, potentially misleading. While it may be a waste of time to look for true chip & PINS from a US <b><u>bank</b></u>, some are available from US <b><u>credit unions</b></u>. And, for some purposes, whether your card is a true Chip & PIN or not can matter a <b><u>great deal</b></u>!
Apr 29th, 2015, 04:50 AM
#44
kja - I think things are getting (even more) confused. What I am getting from this thread is:
There are chip and signature only cards, which may be becoming the US standard.
There are chip and PIN only cards, which apparently are only available from one bank in the US, but are the European standard.
There are cards that use chip and signature as first choice and chip and PIN as back up, which are available from a few US credit unions. This is what you (and I) have.
There are chip and signature only cards, which may be becoming the US standard.
There are chip and PIN only cards, which apparently are only available from one bank in the US, but are the European standard.
There are cards that use chip and signature as first choice and chip and PIN as back up, which are available from a few US credit unions. This is what you (and I) have.
Apr 29th, 2015, 11:15 AM
#46
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kja...I am not looking to confuse or argue. I'll give you an example of whaat I mean. Bank of America csr's have been very adamant that no pin is available for their travel rewards card. I did request the cash advance pin.
Last June, I was at CPH (Copenhagen airport) and was attempting to buy a one day local transport pass in a kiosk. I used this card and it asked for a pin. I entered the cash advance pin and voila it worked. This pin, BTW, is an online pin and does not reside on the chip but rather it unlocks the vault so to speak at the Bank of America. The csr swore up and down on a stack of bibles that if I used the pin, it would convert the transaction into a cash advance. I knew that was untrue and so indeed this ended up being a purchase transaction. This is not all that common but if I'm not clear I apologize. All US credit cards for the most part can have a pin assigned for use in ATM's so getting a pin should be no big deal. However, it is very rare that it is requested and will be needed or will work on a purchase transaction.
Thursdaysd did clear up much more eloquently than I write what may be confusing. And then there's a definition of terms. I stand by what I said. As it stands now, apparently there is only one US bank issuing what I consider to be a "true" chip and pin card; by definition a card that will request a pin in a Walmart emv terminal. That is UNFCU. Many FCU's and banks do offer cards that have pin backups such as Andrews FCU, State Department FCU, Pentagon FCU. Barclaycard Arrival+ with its $89 annual fee also works the same way and their literature is very clear what is going on. USAA did once offer such a card. It stopped doing so in April 2014 and switched to what for lack of a better term I refer to as a hybrid card i.e. it defaults to chip and signature if the merchant's pos (point of sale) terminal will process it but can fall back, on a lower priority, to a pin in many kiosks and unattended terminals. You may consider that chip and pin and that's your prerogative and that's fine. It's not worth arguing over. Other banks, such as Chase and now apparently Capital One, do not even have pins listed on their cvm's (card verification methods) on the chip.
The big problem in this whole scenario is becoming less and less of a problem. At the urging mostly of Visa International, regulations have been introduced that will prohibit unattended kiosks from outright rejection of an otherwise valid emv compliant card for lack of a pin. How effective it will be, nobody knows. It seems, though, as I said, to be having some positive effects in that there are fewer and fewer complaints of US residents being stranded up the creek without a paddle because of lack of a pin (that is if they are like me and don't believe in paying cash for anything. But there will always be problems. For example, many French autoroutes are notorious for only accepting French credit cards and it hasnothing to do with whether there is a pin or not.
Now this will come up again and again until all the misinformation and misconceptions out there are clarified. I believe I have given the latest information based on my read of the Flyer Talk, now 735 pages long, thread. The assertion made by some that chip and signature cards are worthless is simply not true. Does a pin increase security? Yes to some degree. Nobody is disputing that. But personally, I don't lay awake at night worrying that my chip and signature card may be hacked. It surely will be at some point in the future as it has been in the past. And then I will breathe a sigh of relief that I have zero liability for such fraud, call my bank, get a new card with a new number, update the automatic billing merchants and life will return to normal with a tiny bit of inconvenience but it will be dealt with.
Over and out.
Last June, I was at CPH (Copenhagen airport) and was attempting to buy a one day local transport pass in a kiosk. I used this card and it asked for a pin. I entered the cash advance pin and voila it worked. This pin, BTW, is an online pin and does not reside on the chip but rather it unlocks the vault so to speak at the Bank of America. The csr swore up and down on a stack of bibles that if I used the pin, it would convert the transaction into a cash advance. I knew that was untrue and so indeed this ended up being a purchase transaction. This is not all that common but if I'm not clear I apologize. All US credit cards for the most part can have a pin assigned for use in ATM's so getting a pin should be no big deal. However, it is very rare that it is requested and will be needed or will work on a purchase transaction.
Thursdaysd did clear up much more eloquently than I write what may be confusing. And then there's a definition of terms. I stand by what I said. As it stands now, apparently there is only one US bank issuing what I consider to be a "true" chip and pin card; by definition a card that will request a pin in a Walmart emv terminal. That is UNFCU. Many FCU's and banks do offer cards that have pin backups such as Andrews FCU, State Department FCU, Pentagon FCU. Barclaycard Arrival+ with its $89 annual fee also works the same way and their literature is very clear what is going on. USAA did once offer such a card. It stopped doing so in April 2014 and switched to what for lack of a better term I refer to as a hybrid card i.e. it defaults to chip and signature if the merchant's pos (point of sale) terminal will process it but can fall back, on a lower priority, to a pin in many kiosks and unattended terminals. You may consider that chip and pin and that's your prerogative and that's fine. It's not worth arguing over. Other banks, such as Chase and now apparently Capital One, do not even have pins listed on their cvm's (card verification methods) on the chip.
The big problem in this whole scenario is becoming less and less of a problem. At the urging mostly of Visa International, regulations have been introduced that will prohibit unattended kiosks from outright rejection of an otherwise valid emv compliant card for lack of a pin. How effective it will be, nobody knows. It seems, though, as I said, to be having some positive effects in that there are fewer and fewer complaints of US residents being stranded up the creek without a paddle because of lack of a pin (that is if they are like me and don't believe in paying cash for anything. But there will always be problems. For example, many French autoroutes are notorious for only accepting French credit cards and it hasnothing to do with whether there is a pin or not.
Now this will come up again and again until all the misinformation and misconceptions out there are clarified. I believe I have given the latest information based on my read of the Flyer Talk, now 735 pages long, thread. The assertion made by some that chip and signature cards are worthless is simply not true. Does a pin increase security? Yes to some degree. Nobody is disputing that. But personally, I don't lay awake at night worrying that my chip and signature card may be hacked. It surely will be at some point in the future as it has been in the past. And then I will breathe a sigh of relief that I have zero liability for such fraud, call my bank, get a new card with a new number, update the automatic billing merchants and life will return to normal with a tiny bit of inconvenience but it will be dealt with.
Over and out.
Apr 30th, 2015, 06:31 PM
#49
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 29,617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John, I think it may also reflect an evolution that worked for the different countries over the years. Just like Europe had more cell phones first because of lack of telephone wires?
Things should converge as the world gets smaller. Also, someone noted in another thread on this subject, that there is pretty much reciprocity with the major cards in most buying situations.
Things should converge as the world gets smaller. Also, someone noted in another thread on this subject, that there is pretty much reciprocity with the major cards in most buying situations.
May 1st, 2015, 04:07 AM
#50
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John...the answer to your question is buried in the 735 page thread on Flyer Talk. The long and the short of it is the financial institutions make humongous profits on their credit card operations and do not want to do anything to discourage people from using their cards. Hence if it were up to the banks, they would have continued to go with magnetic strips as the latest stats available show they lose 13¢ for every $100 of profit on their card operations due to fraud. I will take that as part of business every day of the week and twice on Sunday! Visa also claims that Americans tend to carry more cards than other nationalities and it might be a pain for some to match up the right pin with the right card. Besides, as they claim, the chip in and of itself provides the same security whether it's chip and pin or chip and signature. The only difference really is if the card is lost. With chip and pin, in general, the card becomes useless (although online fraud could be problem). With chip and signature finders keepers losers weepers as no 16 year old clerk, especially in the United States, will make a fuss about the signature. A solution is to make the pins all the same for all your cards although I am not sure how wise that is. And an infra structure would be needed to easily change pins (done at ATM's in Europe).
That is visa's position on this but of course the money is also an issue. I am sure they have done surveys and found it would cost more to convert the USA to chip and pin than the fraud losses would justify.
The genesis of the problem is, as I said, not the security issue. Credit card fraud is not identity theft and although there is a degree of inconvenience if your account gets hacked, it is relatively simple to deal with as prevalent as it is. The biggest inconvenience to me is changing the account numbers for any merchants I have automatically paid via the card (utilities, phone companies, bridge tolls via ezpass like thing etc.). But then again you have to do the same thing every couple of years when the expiration date changes. The biggest problem in the past has been universal acceptance. Chip and signature cards may not have worked in automated situations such as kiosks and train ticketing machines and the like. Visa clams they are resolving that problem with new regulations.
And do bear in mind, all US issued credit cards and in most other countries too have zero liability for fraud. So it isn't worth laying away at night worrying that your credit card might be compromised because of fraud. If it happens, yo deal with it and the "problem" goes away.
That is visa's position on this but of course the money is also an issue. I am sure they have done surveys and found it would cost more to convert the USA to chip and pin than the fraud losses would justify.
The genesis of the problem is, as I said, not the security issue. Credit card fraud is not identity theft and although there is a degree of inconvenience if your account gets hacked, it is relatively simple to deal with as prevalent as it is. The biggest inconvenience to me is changing the account numbers for any merchants I have automatically paid via the card (utilities, phone companies, bridge tolls via ezpass like thing etc.). But then again you have to do the same thing every couple of years when the expiration date changes. The biggest problem in the past has been universal acceptance. Chip and signature cards may not have worked in automated situations such as kiosks and train ticketing machines and the like. Visa clams they are resolving that problem with new regulations.
And do bear in mind, all US issued credit cards and in most other countries too have zero liability for fraud. So it isn't worth laying away at night worrying that your credit card might be compromised because of fraud. If it happens, yo deal with it and the "problem" goes away.
May 1st, 2015, 05:38 AM
#51
" there is a degree of inconvenience if your account gets hacked"
That inconvenience is considerably greater if you are traveling at the time! I do travel with multiple cards, but that doesn't mean that I will be happy if one of them stops working. And since I travel for months at a time, having the new card mailed to my house is of no help.
" Chip and signature cards may not have worked in automated situations such as kiosks and train ticketing machines and the like."
I believe the correct verb is "did" rather than "may". It is possible that the situation is, as you claim, improving, but that doesn't help someone today who needs their card to work and finds that it does not.
The issues, to me, have nothing to do with fraud. That is a red herring.
That inconvenience is considerably greater if you are traveling at the time! I do travel with multiple cards, but that doesn't mean that I will be happy if one of them stops working. And since I travel for months at a time, having the new card mailed to my house is of no help.
" Chip and signature cards may not have worked in automated situations such as kiosks and train ticketing machines and the like."
I believe the correct verb is "did" rather than "may". It is possible that the situation is, as you claim, improving, but that doesn't help someone today who needs their card to work and finds that it does not.
The issues, to me, have nothing to do with fraud. That is a red herring.
