A warning to dealers..

[Stephen B]

[size=11pt]

In Australia Tap and Go has recently been introduced for electronic card transactions up to (in most cases) A$100.00.

The state Commissioner for the Victorian Police force last week reported a significant increase in credit card thefts from homes, vehicles and letter boxes (new cards are posted). He was very critical of the banks who although they accept liability for customers, appear not to report fraudulent use to the police unless it is of a significant amount. Hence a lot of fraud and theft is going on under the radar.

Now I know $100A will not buy much in the way of Festool tools but it will buy some accessories!    [smile]

 

[Stoli]

I hear what you are saying, Bob, but it sounds like you really want more than a notification of a redirect -- you really want veto power or even the ability to recall back to the shipper.

Here are the possible scenarios:

1) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  No notification to shipper, and package is sent to crook.  Bob loses.  This is the current situation.
2) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and package is still sent to crook. Bob loses.
3) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient returns package.  Bob loses shipping on both ends, but not the XL.
4) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient does not return package.  Bob loses.
5) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper issues a recall.  Bob loses shipping but not the XL.

 

[Sean7a]

I'd be switching to FedEx ground in a heartbeat...

fedex ground has taken 12 bus days,with 3 to go,for my pkg to go thirty frigging miles.
calender day to calender day,im looking at is over three weeks,add four days to pack and ship in the begining.
totals almost a month

Mistakes happen and any carrier is prone to them.  I wouldn't say that's the norm with Fedex, but we also don't ship Fedex per SOP.  I do recall an old shipment that got delayed with the status of "Train Fire & Derailment - Package Delayed".

 

[Sean7a]

I hear what you are saying, Bob, but it sounds like you really want more than a notification of a redirect -- you really want veto power or even the ability to recall back to the shipper.

Stoli, you got it.  That's the point here.  The dealer, who is on the hook, needs to be given a notification and a heads up that the sale has been modified before the product has reached the end user.  The dealer then has time to reach out to the customer, which would result in contacting either the actual card holder (and subsequent cancellation of the order... we get product back and lose shipping) or contract with the thief.  I can tell you form multiple experiences, within seconds of being on the phone with a crook, it's clear as day.  A simple hello is almost enough to tell.

It's interesting to hear some of you talk about class action lawsuits.  I have no experience there, but I wonder if it's something to shine light on for a firm and see if they see it as a worthy project to investigate.

Happy Fathers day all.

 

[jonny round boy]

Surely if you (the dealer) pay FedEx (or whoever) to deliver a package to a specific address, and they fail to deliver it to the address you specified, that's a breach of contract?

A customer shouldn't be able to re-direct a shipment, as the contract of delivery is between the dealer and the carrier. That contract has nothing whatsoever to do with the end recipient.

I'm probably (definitely) over-simplifying the problem, but it seems perfectly obvious and straightforward to me...

Oh, and on a related note - maybe things are different in the UK. I always thought that if something similar happened over here, the CC company was ultimately liable?

 

[Michael Kellough]

I'd be switching to FedEx ground in a heartbeat...

fedex ground has taken 12 bus days,with 3 to go,for my pkg to go thirty frigging miles.
calender day to calender day,im looking at is over three weeks,add four days to pack and ship in the begining.
totals almost a month

Mistakes happen and any carrier is prone to them.  I wouldn't say that's the norm with Fedex, but we also don't ship Fedex per SOP.  I do recall an old shipment that got delayed with the status of "Train Fire & Derailment - Package Delayed".

What does SOP mean?

 

[Michael Kellough]

I hear what you are saying, Bob, but it sounds like you really want more than a notification of a redirect -- you really want veto power or even the ability to recall back to the shipper.

Here are the possible scenarios:

1) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  No notification to shipper, and package is sent to crook.  Bob loses.  This is the current situation.
2) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and package is still sent to crook. Bob loses.
3) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient returns package.  Bob loses shipping on both ends, but not the XL.
4) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient does not return package.  Bob loses.
5) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper issues a recall.  Bob loses shipping but not the XL.

Well done Stoli  [thumbs up]

 

[Bob Marino]

I hear what you are saying, Bob, but it sounds like you really want more than a notification of a redirect -- you really want veto power or even the ability to recall back to the shipper.

Here are the possible scenarios:

1) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  No notification to shipper, and package is sent to crook.  Bob loses.  This is the current situation.
2) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and package is still sent to crook. Bob loses.
3) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient returns package.  Bob loses shipping on both ends, but not the XL.
4) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient does not return package.  Bob loses.
5) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper issues a recall.  Bob loses shipping but not the XL.

Well done Stoli  [thumbs up]

Agree with all of the above, BUT at the least, the shipper must be notified. As Sean mentioned, one call to the thief and you van tell that this guy - USUALLY with a very heavy accent is not John Smith from Main St Ohio.

B

 

[Michael Kellough]

Surely if you (the dealer) pay FedEx (or whoever) to deliver a package to a specific address, and they fail to deliver it to the address you specified, that's a breach of contract?

A customer shouldn't be able to re-direct a shipment, as the contract of delivery is between the dealer and the carrier. That contract has nothing whatsoever to do with the end recipient.

I'm probably (definitely) over-simplifying the problem, but it seems perfectly obvious and straightforward to me...

Oh, and on a related note - maybe things are different in the UK. I always thought that if something similar happened over here, the CC company was ultimately liable?

You'd think...

On the other hand, I've ordered stuff from suppliers who think their responsibility ends with turning the goods over to the shipper.

I used the FedEx version of re-direct years ago when the shipper put the wrong Zip code on the package and delivery failed. It was about to go back to the shipper when I found out and got the re-route sorted. I'm not sure now but it's possible I had to get the shipper involved in the re-direct. I did have to talk with them to figure out what went wrong.

Those were time sensitive supplies and if it had been UPS (at that time UPS reported package status only at the end of the day) instead of FedEx the project would have failed. Also, if I had depended on the supplier to sort it out the project would have failed.

So, I see both sides here. The re-direct protects me from lackadaisical venders but it puts good venders at risk.

 

[John H]

Bob - what did UPS say when you mentioned your concerns to them?

 

[Rick Christopherson]

I hear what you are saying, Bob, but it sounds like you really want more than a notification of a redirect -- you really want veto power or even the ability to recall back to the shipper.

Here are the possible scenarios:

1) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  No notification to shipper, and package is sent to crook.  Bob loses.  This is the current situation.
2) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and package is still sent to crook. Bob loses.
3) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient returns package.  Bob loses shipping on both ends, but not the XL.
4) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient does not return package.  Bob loses.
5) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper issues a recall.  Bob loses shipping but not the XL.

Actually, #4 is a completed sale. The buyer (victim of stolen CC) could not claim the loss to his CC company if the goods were shown to be delivered to his address. Even though the CC victim wasn't originally a legitimate buyer at the beginning, he became the equivalent when he accepted the product.

 

[Bob Marino]

Bob - what did UPS say when you mentioned your concerns to them?

  My warehouse manager spoke to the UPS rep in charge of the fulfillment center and essentially other than implementing the things we are now doing - matching area codes to zip codes, possibly calling a suspect order's phone and holding off on MY CHOICE. They were able to suppy us with the delivered address of the last stolen XL, but then the onus is on me tp persue further - which I will.

Bob

 

[peter halle]

Michael.

SOP= Standard Operating Procedures

 

[Stoli]

4) After shipping, crook submits a redirect.  UPS informs shipper, and shipper vetoes redirect.  Package is sent to original address where it shows up as an unrequested package.  Original recipient does not return package.  Bob loses.

Actually, #4 is a completed sale. The buyer (victim of stolen CC) could not claim the loss to his CC company if the goods were shown to be delivered to his address. Even though the CC victim wasn't originally a legitimate buyer at the beginning, he became the equivalent when he accepted the product.

From the consumer end, how can we tell the difference between fraud and unsolicited goods?  If a package ends up at my doorstep that I did not order, I am under no obligation to purchase or even return the package.

"Acceptance" is also pretty loose here -- UPS may just leave the package at the house when no one is present.  Does that count as "acceptance"?

Either way, my point was really that vendors really need more than just notification.  I think they need to be able to recall when they suspect fraud.

 

[Tinker]

This whole problem seems to be very complicated.  There are many opinions about how to solve.  Some i understand and some leave me more confused.

The one solution that aggravates me is (from some, but not all replies) the attitude that if something goes wrong, the customer will discontinue doing business with the supplier.  A very dogmatic position to say the least.  It was not the suppliers fault.  The supplier is the loser all around.  Would it be a better solution to stop doing business with the shipper, and maybe even the CC who will not help out in any way. 

I know the CC's have a tremendous leverage and it really gets my dander up when they will not help. My own CC has notified me almost instantly when a fraudulent purchase was made.  The most recent was to the tune of $3600.  While we were discussing the problem, the lady said, "OMG, here is another one for the same amount showing up on the screen!"  I don't know what they did on their end but they cancelled my card right away and sent me a new one (different #) Apparently they don't do that all the time from what I am reading here. 

Tinker

 

[Sparktrician]

I know the CC's have a tremendous leverage and it really gets my dander up when they will not help. My own CC has notified me almost instantly when a fraudulent purchase was made.  The most recent was to the tune of $3600.  While we were discussing the problem, the lady said, "OMG, here is another one for the same amount showing up on the screen!"  I don't know what they did on their end but they cancelled my card right away and sent me a new one (different #) Apparently they don't do that all the time from what I am reading here. 

Tinker

My bank (USAA) has been wonderful when I have been hit with fraudulent charges.  They even called me one afternoon and asked where I was.  I told them, "Sitting in my living room."  "You're not in the UK?" "No, I'm in Virginia."  The bottom line is that my card was cancelled and replaced immediately and no fraudulent charges have ever hit my pocket.  I can't say enough good about their services.  It appears to me that the shipping companies that allow this to occur without permission from the vendor are the problem. 

 

[shed9]

My bank (USAA) has been wonderful when I have been hit with fraudulent charges.  They even called me one afternoon and asked where I was.  I told them, "Sitting in my living room."  "You're not in the UK?" "No, I'm in Virginia."  The bottom line is that my card was cancelled and replaced immediately and no fraudulent charges have ever hit my pocket.  I can't say enough good about their services.  It appears to me that the shipping companies that allow this to occur without permission from the vendor are the problem.

That is actually quite common for a lot of banks, the problem is that they are not addressing why they need that service in the first place.

 

[Stoli]

Note that Bob (a dealer) intended this to be a warning to other dealers.

If it was your card used in this type of fraud, the bank would likely cancel the charge. However, the XL has still been shipped to the thief, and I seriously doubt that the bank is going to pay the dealer anything.  So the dealer loses.  This was Bob's warning.

 

[shed9]

Note that Bob (a dealer) intended this to be a warning to other dealers.

If it was your card used in this type of fraud, the bank would likely cancel the charge. However, the XL has still been shipped to the thief, and I seriously doubt that the bank is going to pay the dealer anything.  So the dealer loses.  This was Bob's warning.

I think most of us understood that Stoli [smile], however this isn't always a victimless crime from a customer perspective, hence the related comments.

 

[RC]

I know the CC's have a tremendous leverage and it really gets my dander up when they will not help. My own CC has notified me almost instantly when a fraudulent purchase was made.  The most recent was to the tune of $3600.  While we were discussing the problem, the lady said, "OMG, here is another one for the same amount showing up on the screen!"  I don't know what they did on their end but they cancelled my card right away and sent me a new one (different #) Apparently they don't do that all the time from what I am reading here. 

It depends on the issuing bank how they set up their fraud control rules. In Finland we do very proactive card closures and re-issuance on the slightest indication of the card number or mag.stripe image being exposed to criminals.

We receive these indications both from the authorities and card brands as well as through our own heuristic and behavioral monitoring systems and act accordingly. Some banks have higher risk acceptance limits and especially in large card holder data leakage cases the renewals need to be planned and risk assessed thoroughly due to logistics and related costs involved in manufacturing massive amounts of new cards.

What you describe is a typical example of proactive monitoring kicking in when a non-conforming transaction has tripped the behavioral monitoring system alert and the CC rep called you before the second attempt even came through. In these cases there are really no other options than cancel the current card and re-issue a new card when active exploitation is underway.