logoalt Hacker News

SJC_Hackeryesterday at 2:04 AM4 repliesview on HN

Because they are on the hook for fraudulent transactions, until they get to merchant to refund. Otherwise they wouldn't care.

Which is why some merchants get effectively blacklisted if they have too many fraudulent transactions


Replies

miiiiiikeyesterday at 4:58 AM

No, I get it. Give me a "Freedom Card" or whatever that generates a one-time use number/cvv combo, backed by cash, that I'm fully responsible for. If I give a guy on the corner $5 cash and he walks off with it, that's between me and him. We don't need to resort to crypto. I don't care if there's a paper trail, I don't need to be anonymous. I just don't want money people to have any say in how people choose to spend their money.

show 3 replies
lxgryesterday at 3:09 AM

The card networks are never on the hook for fraudulent transactions (nor for any other type of chargeback for that matter). If anything, it's the merchant's payment service provider/card acquirer that absorbs the loss if the merchant can't pay.

show 1 reply
nulbyteyesterday at 11:22 AM

No they aren't. Fraudulent card not present transactions are fully on the backs of merchants. The networks and banks don't lose a dime of them. In fact, they make more money now, charging additional fees when disputes are filed, and additional fees when they are challenged.

jjeaffyesterday at 3:04 AM

that wouldn't apply in this case, because the vendor, Valve, would be on the hook for fraudulent purchases and they would definitely have the deep pockets to pay out. The cc companies only have to worry about the small, fly by night companies that might disappear after a bunch of fraud.