Hmm…I was just in the UK in July and didn’t really see this. Granted, most of my dinners were at the pub, but we did eat at regular sit-down restaurants a couple of times. I did come across the chip reader at a T-Mobil store, but they had to swipe my card, since US cards don’t have the chips.
ETA: It’s possible/probable I didn’t see this because of the fact that the chip & pin was impossible with my card, anyway.
That would be the reason.
If you have a European card you have to use the C&P (not sure what happens if the chip won’t read). If your card has no chip it has to be swiped.
In the last two years, i’ve eaten out in New York, Los Angeles, Washington D.C., San Francisco, San Diego, and Baltimore, and have never seen this system at work. Hell, in new York City, there are still plenty of restaurants that won’t even take credit cards.
It appears that this system hasn’t reached the US, yet.
You’ll like it when it does. It’s more secure, faster and less hassle.
Do they leave the machine at the table and let you do it all in your own time? Or do they stand and wait until you pay?
Because, while i always tip well, i’m not really keen on having my waiter stand over me while i type in my tip. Also, when the waiter puts down the bill, i’m often not ready to pay immediately. If i’m chatting with my friends, it might sit there a few minutes before we sort it out.
They leave the bill and when you signal you desire to pay they bring the machine.
Obviously they stay reasonably close while you enter the details but they do not watch while you make entries.
I’ve not seen the machine you’re describing used in the United States yet, but I’ve only eat there fewer than six times in the last year. I remember one restaurant in the greater Toronto area that was using them during my year there in 2007. I thought they were great. Now that I’m here in Mexico City area, I see them popping up more and more often. Their use really helps alleviate concerns for fraud.
They’re also in frequent use in Mexico City area gas stations, which are all full-service.
I’ve never seen these machines used anywhere outside of the Mexico City area, though.
I also recall an article from a Nevada newspaper last year (or maybe the year before) describing how one restaurant there was going to be groundbreaking in the state for offering these.
In my experience, the waiter waits for you to approve the amount, and then then there are choices for tip flat percentages (including 0%) or “other.”
I figure that if my favorite low-class joint in Michigan can offer BuzzTime, then they can offer these mobile terminals, too. Maybe someday.
The downside is that fraud liability has been shifted from the bank to the consumer (unless the consumer can prove they didn’t perform the transaction and didn’t reveal their pin).
Here’s a big example of fraud:
Why not round so that the total amount is a palindrome?
Food: $22.94
Tip: $4.59 (20%)
Total: $27.53
Round up to $27.72
If someone tries to screw you, they’re unlikely to realise you’ve arranged it this way on purpose - more likely to slip a whole dollar in, breaking the palindrome
Not really.
Unless someone happens to commit a fraud local to and at a time when a person was within an area it is fairly easy to demonstrate that you did not use a card.
The banks are saving an enormous amount with the introduction of chip and pin and do not want to rock the boat by demanding unreasonable levels of proof before accepting that a fraud has taken place.
Remember, the first person who took a bank to court because their complaint of fraud on their account was not accepted by the bank and then won their case would open up the floodgates.
Yes really. The laws in your country changed. Go read up on it.
It’s fairly easy to prove to the bank that you did not use the card? If someone has your card number and is able to circumvent the PIN system in the local reader (not difficult, there are published hacks), how exactly are you going to prove to the bank that it wasn’t you and that you didn’t reveal your PIN to someone?
Here’s a case where someone is trying to prove a transaction is fraudulent, can you tell me how the bank was able to prove that his card was used? Keep in mind that the Chinese placed eavesdropping equipment in thousands of readers (see previous article I linked to).
I tip roughly %10 or $2 min a person…I rarely do anything over $30 for an outage. Frugal Dining for two, lower mid scale.
I don’t find the service much better tipping anymore or less.
Servers hate their jobs and the places they work. They are disgusted serving anyone and rather be someplace else, after serving for any length of time.
Occasionally, you find someone who is worthy for more tip, but that’s unusual anymore.
I’m not cheap, I’m just not paying $50 for 20 freaking wings and a pitcher of beer.
$27.59 = $30 including tip on card…and maybe a couple dollars cash left on the table is what I do, depends if I’m so inclined.
I been eating out for the past 6 months, and yes I have noticed.
No one gives a rats ass.
(The premise of this post originally, was to always keep the numbers an EVEN DOLLAR AMOUNT, then next rational amount, and let them divi-up the change)
Which laws? Citation?
Obviously the bank were very confident of their ground in this case.
As I said, the first time someone won their case the floodgates would open (that’s assuming the banks are acting intransigently in these cases. I’ve seen virtually no complaints about C&P problems and that contrasts noticeably with the number of complaints there used to be with the swipe card system.
Anyway, you’ll need to get used to the idea because people are starting to push for C&P in the US: Wallmart.
Not laws, I was wrong about that. It was the banks and payment processing organizations that changed their rules.
Being confident and being correct are two very different things. That is exactly the problem with the liability shift.
Even if we assume the banks have the best of intentions in a fraud dispute, proving that you did not reveal your PIN when someone has a duplicate of your card and PIN is a very difficult thing to do, right?
I know. I’m not opposed to solving problems of fraud with technology. I just happen to be aware of the difficulty in creating a truly secure system and have little faith that banks (or most companies) employ the “best and the brightest”.
Vulnerability to get past PIN:
As for adoption in the US: the cost of converting is huge and there doesn’t seem to be much of a push yet (Walmart alone will take 5 to 8 years to swap out all of their POS’s). So it’s probably going to be a while, I assume it will be more of a gradual shift where the same card can be used either method.
qpw3141: if you read the PDF “Chip and Pin is Broken” from the Cambridge researchers, they describe some of their experiences assisting people with fraud disputes.
There are, apparently, a lot of compromised cards. And yet we hear very little about phantom withdrawals. In the one case linked here it seems that the bank were successful which means that they convinced a court that they were not at fault.
Unless we assume that everyone else who has suffered a phantom withdrawal has just quietly accepted the fact and not sued or kicked up a stink on consumer watchdog programmes it seems likely that the banks are quietly putting matters right.
When there were phantom withdrawals using swipe cards the banks were, initially, completely intransigent. Once it became know that the cards were not inviolate they had to change their ways. I suspect that they are adopting a similar tack now. Given the amount of CCTV in use nowadays it could be pretty risky claiming fraudulent card use if that were not the case.
Whatever, the banks are clearly playing their cards very close to their chests.
Since I looked into this yesterday I keep reading that it’s a massive job to change the US over, but it’s no more massive per capita than it was in Europe and that changeover was managed fairly quickly and efficiently.
I can’t really see what the difference is in the US.
Which means what exactly? It was a one day trial with a judge determining the person was at fault. You think a judge (or jury) can accurately determine what is going on in a technical matter of this nature?
If you read the PDF I mentioned you will see a graph. Between 2004 and 2008 CC fraud for UK issued cards increased from 563m to 704m. “Card Not Present” (mostly on-line) goes from 150m to >300m.
I can’t tell you how much the banks or the merchants or the consumers are eating out of this pie, but I wouldn’t like the burden of proof to be on me that someone else’s security system was compromised.
I wouldn’t disagree that the size of the job is similar. The difference is that in Europe there was a strong push for the technology (due to fraud after fall of soviet union), but in the US the banks seem to be ok with managing fraud the way they do, there doesn’t seem to be a strong business case for it, from their perspective.
No.
Under English civili law the judge has to determine whether the defendant is at fault on the balance of probabilities. If he decides that there is not enough evidence one way or the other he must find for the defendant.
It remains to be seen what happens on appeal.
I wouldn’t disagree that the size of the job is similar. The difference is that in Europe there was a strong push for the technology (due to fraud after fall of soviet union), but in the US the banks seem to be ok with managing fraud the way they do, there doesn’t seem to be a strong business case for it, from their perspective.
[/QUOTE]
Well, Walmart seems to be pushing.
Of course, it may be that a lot more is going on behind the scenes.
Which is exactly why the shift of liability in the case of PIN usage is problematic.
Here are some questions for you:
Yes Walmart is pushing. 2 points;
What exactly is this shift you keep talking about?
The banks have always held people liable for use of ATM cards even before P&C.
This is something that will have to be resolved by case law.
If the banks act in an intransigent manner and people start taking them to court it will rapidly become clear that something is wrong and it will be harder for them to stonewall about the weaknesses in their systems.
You have to be aware that lying under oath (such as swearing that no one else has ever known your PIN) is a very risky strategy. At any time a bank decides to do so it can hire a private detective and, armed with the inevitable CCTV images, find any connection between a dishonest disputant and the person using the card.
Where does this figure come from?
It seems extraordinarily pessimistic considering the speed at which Europe was converted. I wonder if it isn’t just wishful thinking on the part of those who do not want to see the system implemented.
It’s not a trivial undertaking but it’s now a mature technology with plenty of deployment experience available.
Five to eight years seems to be a figure plucked from thin air. That’s one hell of a time frame for such a technological change.