<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quick Checks to Prevent Credit Card Fraud</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.returncustomer.com/2005/11/14/quick-checks-to-prevent-credit-card-fraud/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.returncustomer.com/2005/11/14/quick-checks-to-prevent-credit-card-fraud/</link>
	<description>Learn beneficial marketing and business principles from everyday experiences</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:08:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.returncustomer.com/2005/11/14/quick-checks-to-prevent-credit-card-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-43</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:14:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.returncustomer.com/?p=104#comment-43</guid>
		<description>Konstantinos: very funny links!

Jim: I think &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; signature validation would be better than none. And since I&#039;m proposing that merchants check both the signature and ID, they&#039;d hopefully have the driver&#039;s license there and could double check that signature as you suggest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Konstantinos: very funny links!</p>
<p>Jim: I think <em>any</em> signature validation would be better than none. And since I&#8217;m proposing that merchants check both the signature and ID, they&#8217;d hopefully have the driver&#8217;s license there and could double check that signature as you suggest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://www.returncustomer.com/2005/11/14/quick-checks-to-prevent-credit-card-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:04:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.returncustomer.com/?p=104#comment-41</guid>
		<description>@Glenn:  Regarding your &#039;ASK FOR ID&#039; method: you should know that the credit card companies will consider your card invalid should there be any claims of fraudulent transactions against it, which can open you up to (at least some) liability for the disputed charges.  I&#039;m not familiar with the exact procedure, however, and it varies considerably between credit companies (e.g., Visa, Mastercard, Amex).  I only know this much because I used to do the same thing until my then-significant other, who worked for a credit card processing company, told me that not signing my card was essentially a breach of the contract between me and the creditor and they could refuse to honor the liability portions because the card wasn&#039;t signed.  What you should do is both sign the card and write &#039;ASK FOR ID&#039; on it (you can write your signature as tiny as you like).  Also, merchants are within their rights to refuse to accept your card unless it&#039;s signed (in fact, they are supposed to refuse but obviously most don&#039;t).  This is why cards say &#039;Not valid unless signed&#039; on the back.

@Joe: The signature on the back of the card is meant to be compared to the signature on your driver license, not the signature on the receipt as is generally done (erroneously and due to lack of proper training).  This is much more reliable since the user would have to forge your driver license *and* your signature from the back of the card.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Glenn:  Regarding your &#8216;ASK FOR ID&#8217; method: you should know that the credit card companies will consider your card invalid should there be any claims of fraudulent transactions against it, which can open you up to (at least some) liability for the disputed charges.  I&#8217;m not familiar with the exact procedure, however, and it varies considerably between credit companies (e.g., Visa, Mastercard, Amex).  I only know this much because I used to do the same thing until my then-significant other, who worked for a credit card processing company, told me that not signing my card was essentially a breach of the contract between me and the creditor and they could refuse to honor the liability portions because the card wasn&#8217;t signed.  What you should do is both sign the card and write &#8216;ASK FOR ID&#8217; on it (you can write your signature as tiny as you like).  Also, merchants are within their rights to refuse to accept your card unless it&#8217;s signed (in fact, they are supposed to refuse but obviously most don&#8217;t).  This is why cards say &#8216;Not valid unless signed&#8217; on the back.</p>
<p>@Joe: The signature on the back of the card is meant to be compared to the signature on your driver license, not the signature on the receipt as is generally done (erroneously and due to lack of proper training).  This is much more reliable since the user would have to forge your driver license *and* your signature from the back of the card.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Konstantinos</title>
		<link>http://www.returncustomer.com/2005/11/14/quick-checks-to-prevent-credit-card-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>Konstantinos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2005 19:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.returncustomer.com/?p=104#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Related:The Credit Card Prank -- &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.zug.com/pranks/credit/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Part 1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.zug.com/pranks/credit_card/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Part 2&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Related:The Credit Card Prank &#8212; <a href="http://www.zug.com/pranks/credit/" rel="nofollow">Part 1</a>, <a href="http://www.zug.com/pranks/credit_card/" rel="nofollow">Part 2</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.returncustomer.com/2005/11/14/quick-checks-to-prevent-credit-card-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2005 18:35:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.returncustomer.com/?p=104#comment-39</guid>
		<description>Glenn: You&#039;re right. It seems the more convenience we accept as a society, the more we sacrifice our privacy and security. This trade-off will eventually get the best of us if we aren&#039;t careful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Glenn: You&#8217;re right. It seems the more convenience we accept as a society, the more we sacrifice our privacy and security. This trade-off will eventually get the best of us if we aren&#8217;t careful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Glenn</title>
		<link>http://www.returncustomer.com/2005/11/14/quick-checks-to-prevent-credit-card-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:31:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.returncustomer.com/?p=104#comment-38</guid>
		<description>Instead of signing the back of my credit cards, I write, with a sharpie, &quot;ASK FOR I.D.&quot; I&#039;ve been doing this ever since the 80&#039;s and I notice more cashiers are asking to see my ID. But I&#039;m also noticing a trend where, at some retailers, you don&#039;t have to sign anything if the transactions under, say $20. While I like the convenience of getting checked out faster, I&#039;m not sure about the security.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Instead of signing the back of my credit cards, I write, with a sharpie, &#8220;ASK FOR I.D.&#8221; I&#8217;ve been doing this ever since the 80&#8242;s and I notice more cashiers are asking to see my ID. But I&#8217;m also noticing a trend where, at some retailers, you don&#8217;t have to sign anything if the transactions under, say $20. While I like the convenience of getting checked out faster, I&#8217;m not sure about the security.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
