Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sevenlayermuddle]

[broadstairs]

This is worrying from a fraud/theft perspective in that I understood that the limit was there in order to prevent large amounts of money being taken if the card/device had been stolen/cloned. It is not something I'd be happy with if I it happened to me, although I dont have the capability with my phone and nor do I want it although I do have contactless cards but that's because I dont have a choice.

Stuart

[sevenlayermuddle]

[mlmclaren]

The terminals always show the contactless symbol regardless of whether it will accept or not..

The reason for the contactless sales going through on certain tills and with certain cashiers is due to a configuration mishap...

This has happened before and the company or card machine vendors send updated configs out to be assigned to cashiers and the tills.

Also the same with Apple Pay and other Mobile payments... it's not mean't to work unless the Apple Symbol is present but it will but just come up as a credit card to the retailer....

However with Apple Pay there has been many occasions where payments have been taken twice or even 3 times in one occurrence... so its not recommended to use Apple Pay unless the contactless machine is advertising Apple Pay compatibility.

[sevenlayermuddle]

it's not mean't to work unless the Apple Symbol is present but it will but just come up as a credit card to the retailer....

Incorrect, Apple are quite clear that it can be used as long as either the normal 'contactless' symbol, or the Apple Pay logo, are displayed.

http://www.apple.com/uk/apple-pay/

However with Apple Pay there has been many occasions where payments have been taken twice or even 3 times in one occurrence... so its not recommended to use Apple Pay unless the contactless machine is advertising Apple Pay compatibility.

I had never heard of this.  A few minutes on Google reveals that Bank of America had some teething troubles, but no other bank seems to have been affected and  I can see no evidence that it was the fault of Apple Pay, or any evidence that anybody with authority is saying it's not recommended.   ? 

[sevenlayermuddle]

[speedyrite]

[sevenlayermuddle]

My own comments re Waitrose relate to the old fashioned 'staffed' checkouts, the quick-scans may be different hardware but I'd certainly be interested to hear if so...

As things stand, I'm not at all sure that the Apple Pay symbol means anything at all as it's certainly not necessary for Apple Pay to work.    Cynically I wonder, do Apple simply 'sponsor' the manufacturer/vendor  to display it as advertising, same as PC manufacturers get paid  by Intel for putting an 'Intel inside' sticker on their tin work?

[speedyrite]

[sevenlayermuddle]

[speedyrite]

[speedyrite]

[sevenlayermuddle]

That's all interesting, thanks.

Slightly off-topic from transaction limits, but I noticed a leaflet enclosed with a recent bank statement, entitled something like 'important changes to your T&C'.

Buried in the small print it went on to say that, if a customer registers a card for mobile phone payment, and if they share the phone passcode code with anybody else, or allow anybody else's fingerprint to unlock the device as required to make payments, they'd treat the customer as deliberately failing to keep details safe.  And presumably then, they'd refuse to compensate for fraud.

Something to bear in mind, for anybody using a phone for payment.  There is no mention of spouses being an exception, but  I bet a lot of people allow spouses or other halves to know the passcode or to have a fingerprint ID?   

[speedyrite]

Bit of a minefield then!