In message , at 10:31:05 on Sat, 25 Feb
2017, tim... remarked:

If you used Auto Top-up, you wouldn't have that problem.

I don't use Oyster enough to justify lending TfL so much money.

me neither

the auto-top-up that works for me is

5 pounds added when it goes below 5 pounds

Only £20 or £40 is available currently, and the trigger is £10.
--
Roland Perry

On 2017-02-25 12:14:53 +0000, Roland Perry said:

Only £20 or £40 is available currently, and the trigger is £10.

For anyone with a contactless card it's kind of losing its role anyway.
I cashed all my Oysters in and now just use contactless.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 12:47:25 +0000
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2017-02-25 12:14:53 +0000, Roland Perry said:

Only £20 or £40 is available currently, and the trigger is £10.

For anyone with a contactless card it's kind of losing its role anyway.
I cashed all my Oysters in and now just use contactless.

Gotta love contactless. Chip and pin arrives - there being a damn good reason
for the PIN - then the banks decide they'll get more transactions if they
remove the PIN and pretend its not really needed after all. So why do I
need one if I put the card in the slot but not if I use contactless? What
exactly is the qualitative difference? Answer: there isn't one. But the
banks have convinced suckers theres no security risk with contactless. Ah
well, you can't educate pork. Must be a field day for card thieves.

--
Spud

On 2017-02-25 18:59:08 +0000, d said:

Gotta love contactless. Chip and pin arrives - there being a damn good reason
for the PIN - then the banks decide they'll get more transactions if they
remove the PIN and pretend its not really needed after all. So why do I
need one if I put the card in the slot but not if I use contactless? What
exactly is the qualitative difference? Answer: there isn't one.

There's a *quantitative* difference, namely the £30 cap, and the fact
that if you do more than N transactions in a row the PIN will be called
for.

Yes, thieves could nick a wallet and go around spending about 5 x £30
(£150) with it before they had issues. But that's not going to, er,
break the bank. And if it did happen, the end customer is not liable.

It's basically making cards more of an effective replacement for cash,
and I encourage that, as cash is a faff (and encourages the black
market etc).

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On 2017-02-25 18:59:08 +0000, d said:

Gotta love contactless. Chip and pin arrives - there being a damn good
reason for the PIN - then the banks decide they'll get more transactions
if they remove the PIN and pretend its not really needed after all. So
why do I need one if I put the card in the slot but not if I use
contactless? What exactly is the qualitative difference? Answer:
there isn't one.

There's a *quantitative* difference, namely the £30 cap, and the fact
that if you do more than N transactions in a row the PIN will be
called for.

Yes, thieves could nick a wallet and go around spending about 5 x £30
(£150) with it before they had issues. But that's not going to, er,
break the bank. And if it did happen, the end customer is not liable.

It's basically making cards more of an effective replacement for
cash, and I encourage that, as cash is a faff (and encourages the
black market etc).

While I agree with you, would a contactless card be declined at a TfL
gateline for lack of a PIN?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 19:16:49 +0000
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2017-02-25 18:59:08 +0000, d said:

Gotta love contactless. Chip and pin arrives - there being a damn good reason
for the PIN - then the banks decide they'll get more transactions if they
remove the PIN and pretend its not really needed after all. So why do I
need one if I put the card in the slot but not if I use contactless? What
exactly is the qualitative difference? Answer: there isn't one.

There's a *quantitative* difference, namely the £30 cap, and the fact
that if you do more than N transactions in a row the PIN will be called
for.

For various values of N.

Yes, thieves could nick a wallet and go around spending about 5 x £30
(£150) with it before they had issues. But that's not going to, er,
break the bank. And if it did happen, the end customer is not liable.

Oh sure. All you have to do is get a crime number from plod then sit on an
0845 number going through half a dozen menus to eventually get through to
some gimp from india who you need to convince that you're not trying to
commit fraud. And then you might get your money back next week. Great so
long as you don't need it in the meantime.

It's basically making cards more of an effective replacement for cash,
and I encourage that, as cash is a faff (and encourages the black
market etc).

In what universe is cash a faff??

--
Spud

wrote in message
news
On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 19:16:49 +0000
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2017-02-25 18:59:08 +0000, d said:

Gotta love contactless. Chip and pin arrives - there being a damn good
reason
for the PIN - then the banks decide they'll get more transactions if
they
remove the PIN and pretend its not really needed after all. So why do I
need one if I put the card in the slot but not if I use contactless?
What
exactly is the qualitative difference? Answer: there isn't one.

There's a *quantitative* difference, namely the £30 cap, and the fact
that if you do more than N transactions in a row the PIN will be called
for.

For various values of N.

Yes, thieves could nick a wallet and go around spending about 5 x £30
(£150) with it before they had issues. But that's not going to, er,
break the bank. And if it did happen, the end customer is not liable.

Oh sure. All you have to do is get a crime number from plod

Oh no you don't

then sit on an
0845 number going through half a dozen menus to eventually get through to
some gimp from india who you need to convince that you're not trying to
commit fraud. And then you might get your money back next week.

that's probably true :-(

tim

On 2017-02-26 12:59:28 +0000, tim... said:

Oh sure. All you have to do is get a crime number from plod

Oh no you don't

then sit on an
0845 number going through half a dozen menus to eventually get through to
some gimp from india who you need to convince that you're not trying to
commit fraud. And then you might get your money back next week.

that's probably true :-(

I've been hit by (pre-C&P) card fraud twice. In both cases, it was the
bank that pointed it out to me, by phoning and asking if I really did
make certain transactions.

I get an automated call like that every now and then if my spending
pattern is in any way out of character.

While if I have £100 in my wallet, and my wallet is nicked, my £100 is
gone for good.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 12:59:28 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
Oh sure. All you have to do is get a crime number from plod

Oh no you don't

I imagine it depends on the bank. Using someone elses card without permission
is fraud and the police probably would want it reported anyway though perhaps
some banks wouldn't.

--
Spud

On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 19:16:49 +0000, Neil Williams
wrote:

On 2017-02-25 18:59:08 +0000, d said:

Gotta love contactless. Chip and pin arrives - there being a damn good reason
for the PIN - then the banks decide they'll get more transactions if they
remove the PIN and pretend its not really needed after all. So why do I
need one if I put the card in the slot but not if I use contactless? What
exactly is the qualitative difference? Answer: there isn't one.

There's a *quantitative* difference, namely the £30 cap, and the fact
that if you do more than N transactions in a row the PIN will be called
for.

Yes, thieves could nick a wallet and go around spending about 5 x £30
(£150) with it before they had issues. But that's not going to, er,
break the bank. And if it did happen, the end customer is not liable.

It's basically making cards more of an effective replacement for cash,
and I encourage that, as cash is a faff (and encourages the black
market etc).

Neil

Cash is so simple and fast. Perhaps not as fast as contactless but I
will not use contactless for lots of reasons. I have two such cards
and hope, when they are replaced to get new cards without that
dangerous and vulnerable feature.
Do you and others that use traceable payments not value just a tiny
bit of privacy? I have 4 credit cards (and a debit card) each used
for very specific purposes so no one creditor knows all about me.


Guy Gorton