Print

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

[Alex Atkin UK]

Curious, I wonder if this is something specifically requested or something they just flag after you've made x number of payments so its ignored when doing fraud detection?

[tiffy]

Quote by Alex Atkin UK:

I assume you mean Debit Card rather than DD which usually means Direct Debit?

Did actually mean Direct Debit.
On reflection may have picked this up incorrectly from my bank at the time as by my understanding a DD is associated with an account number rather than a debit card.
On notifying the bank on all 3 occasions they immediately cancelled and re-issued my debit card so there must have been some direct connection to this.

The point I was trying to make is that cancelling and re-issuing my debit card did not stop the two further fraudulent transactions by the perpetrator by whatever means was being deployed, only direct communication with Netflix finally resolved the issue.

Later posts on this topic have certainly provided education on the finer points of banking systems I was not aware of. 

[aesmith]

Cancelling and re-issuing a Debit Card won't have any effect on a Direct Debit mandate as that doesn't reference the card in any way. On the other hand assuming you have Internet banking it's dead easy to cancel a Direct Debit yourself.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Its also worth looking into as when you end a contract with a company, the DD doesn't necessarily get cancelled at the bank, the company just stops making the request.  This to me is rather sketchy as it means any glitch and they could request a rogue payment without you even knowing until its come out.

As such, I've taken to always manually cancelling the DD on Internet banking after the last payment has been taken.

That "new details being shared" with credit/debit cards is also awfully sketchy as a business I hadn't been an active customer with for about a decade got hacked, long after the card I used expired.   Somehow some scammer still was able to make transactions with the details they acquired.  Not sure if it was due to the automatic updating of card details, but I guess it might be if it was incorrectly flagged as a regular payment despite being idle.

[Chrysalis]

Was it actually Prime? The fraudster may have just intimidated it on the CPA.

[aesmith]

That's a good point, I don't know where that description comes from, presumably it's provided by the merchant when they accept the payment, and either they or the bank just pops the last four digits on the end.

[Bowdon]

I've heard a similar story to this a few years back by someone on another forum (I'm assuming it wasn't you).

It was nearly the exact situation. The card had been unused and was physically sitting in a drawer.

Then suddenly it starts getting charged. The guy contacted the bank and went through the same situation as you, though I can't remember if he knew who was taking the money or not.

The bank ended up stopping the card and all transactions, and he was refunded any money lost.

It's an odd situation.

[aesmith]

I've heard a similar story to this a few years back by someone on another forum (I'm assuming it wasn't you).

No, that wasn't me

The bank ended up stopping the card and all transactions, and he was refunded any money lost.

Same end result, we got the money refunded the same day that we made the report.