On 1/08/2013 5:37 PM, Harry McNally wrote: > I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that the fast response of PayWave meant it > was > not authenticating the transaction in real time. So it's not clear to me how > the transaction limit will prevent loss (or theft). If the transaction is > later declined then the merchant has a loss. No - if the transaction is later declined after the bank terminal gave the green light for the customer to walk out with the goods, then the *bank* has the loss, not the merchant.
The banks have fairly large provisions for reimbursing fraud, should it occur - which is why they are pushing the chip/pin/wave model. They have significantly lower levels of successful fraud with the technology, requiring lower levels of reimbursement, than the old magstripe and signature models. Another thought - with the contactless model, the bank can't use the 'you wrote the PIN on a piece of paper in the wallet - so you were negligent and we're not reimbursing you' defence. P. _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
