Barclays Chip and PIN?

[Anonymous]

---

@wasCB14 wrote:

tmiw wote:

On that note, it's strange that we've basically standardized on chip and signature, yet haven't actually mandated it (to where PIN support is disabled on all terminals and signature's forced for foreign cards). It'll eventually be a hassle to have to go to the back of a restaurant while your American friends can still effectively pay at the table, for instance.

---

Restaurants can bring small wireless terminals to the table, where people can enter their PINs.

I, for one, generally feel uneasy when a stranger is alone with one of my cards and out of sight.

---

My personal experience has shown that they aren't doing that here though. Why would they spend the extra money when American cards for the most part don't need a PIN or the tip added before the transaction's run?

[Anonymous]

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thank you! That is a short list. I wish more banks would get on board.

---

Unfortunately greed gets in the way of that.

Banks make more money off of signature transactions here in the states, and make significantly less money when you use a PIN.

Additionally, many merchants are so cheap, they don't buy terminals that consumers have access to, so you still have to give your card to the cashier so they can insert it into the terminal for you... Using a PIN would make the EMV transition even more of a mess than it already is, since you'd have to walk to the back (behind the counter) to enter your PIN in order for the transaction to be successful if the card had PIN priority programmed on it.

But then again, it'd be nice if more merchants would pull their heads out of their butts and get on board with EMV by buying the correct terminals in the first place... Yes I'm looking at you Pizza Hut, Burger King, and Wendy's... But that's another discussion;.

---

Isn't the distinction on credit vs debit transaction?   A credit transaction will earn the same whether chip&pin or chip&sig (or swipe).  Responsibility for fraud may differ.

A big mercant and bank concern is that people would have problems remembering the pins, and then either write them on the card (ruining the point) or just not use the card.    As this doesn't seem to be an issue everywhere else that has gone chip&pin, it's probably not a real issue here either.

---

Debit vs. credit is essentially the same thing as pin vs. signature, at least in the U.S. 

Notice how when you insert/swipe your debit card, it asks for debit or credit? One you enter a PIN, and the other you sign. 

Banks and credit unions encourage you use "credit" when you insert/swipe your debit card because they usually make more money off of the transction, depending on the amount the total comes to when you pay. 

The way the banks see it is if you have a PIN, the chances of fraud are reduced dramatically compared to a signature because someone can't pick up your card and use it unless they know your PIN too. 

[Dalmus]

I think another reason you don't see merchants adopting chip readers as fast as they should is because the average consumer is irritated when it takes 4 times as long as a swipe or cash transaction. Not to mention in high traffic businesses (like fast food) that extra time translates to longer lines and lower sales per hour. That extra 4-6 seconds doesn't seem like much until you multiply it over hundreds of transactions across multiple stations at lunch rush.

European businesses who aren't used to being able to make their own decisions regarding their financial health aren't as bothered by this as much as us greedy Americans that like maximum profit.

[longtimelurker]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

l

Debit vs. credit is essentially the same thing as pin vs. signature, at least in the U.S. 

Notice how when you insert/swipe your debit card, it asks for debit or credit? One you enter a PIN, and the other you sign. 

---

No, they are not!   MOST uses of PINs in the US occur on debit cards, merely because chip&pin for credit isn't widely available, but with a properly set up terminal, and a PIN priority credit card, the transaction will run over the credit (rather than debit) network and charge credit card transaction fee rates.

[Anonymous]

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

No, they are not!   MOST uses of PINs in the US occur on debit cards, merely because chip&pin for credit isn't widely available, but with a properly set up terminal, and a PIN priority credit card, the transaction will run over the credit (rather than debit) network and charge credit card transaction fee rates.

---

Fun fact: a lot of the bigger stores are applying the < $50 no-signature exemption to chip and PIN as well as chip and signature. Target and Walgreens for instance won't ask for a PIN for smaller purchases. (It's allowed by AmEx and Visa but not by MC. However, they seem to be waiving it for MC as well.)

IMO the smaller places with the terminal behind the counter are the ones that need that exemption more than the Targets of the world.

[Anonymous]

So could I select debit when using my Arrival card in order to force the terminal to ask me for a PIN? If the banks make less, I'm all for it for the sake of my local merchants

[Anonymous]

When I am in Europe on vacation, I mostly get by with my CapOne card to escape the FTF (like 99% of the time), but there have been instances like parking meters and the occassional gas station fillup when it doesn't work and I have to pull out my Barclays card. It has FTF, but sure works 100% of the time and is the sole reason I still have it in my wallet.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
So could I select debit when using my Arrival card in order to force the terminal to ask me for a PIN? If the banks make less, I'm all for it for the sake of my local merchants

---

No. If ithe terminal even gave you that option, it'd most likely decline if you tried.

[Open123]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

No, they are not!   MOST uses of PINs in the US occur on debit cards, merely because chip&pin for credit isn't widely available, but with a properly set up terminal, and a PIN priority credit card, the transaction will run over the credit (rather than debit) network and charge credit card transaction fee rates.

---

Fun fact: a lot of the bigger stores are applying the < $50 no-signature exemption to chip and PIN as well as chip and signature. Target and Walgreens for instance won't ask for a PIN for smaller purchases. (It's allowed by AmEx and Visa but not by MC. However, they seem to be waiving it for MC as well.)

IMO the smaller places with the terminal behind the counter are the ones that need that exemption more than the Targets of the world.

---

+1

Right, I'm not fundamentally opposed to the concept of chip & pin, but only want assurances the onus of proof during fraud isn't decided against the consumer simply because a correct pin # was entered.  In addition, I don't want the "oh, you were carless, so it's your fault thing."  Way too much risk to bear.  

Since inception of the chip terminal, the local Trader Joe's line has slowed considerably.  Literally, 50% of consumers need to be walked through on how to use a chip & pin. Even more annoying, every Cashier is dictating to me on how to use the card.  While not a big deal, it's gotten tiresome and annoying after 6 months.  So, when there, I just use the cash only line and prefer Safeways where there's no chip.  Make the $50 exemption, have Federal law codified to stipulate a correct Pin# in of itself isn't proof a consumer used the card, and speed up the processing if possible. 

By the way, in most of Europe, any chip card works on most kiosks/terminals.  Just in the following order:  (1) press enter/clear/cancel; (2) enter any 4 random pin#; and, (3) enter your actual pin#.  You'll find this works more often than not.  However, it didn't work in countries without a large Int'l banking presence, like the Netherlands and a few others.  I'll try when I'm in Europe soon to see if it still works.

[Anonymous]

---

@Dalmus wrote:
I think another reason you don't see merchants adopting chip readers as fast as they should is because the average consumer is irritated when it takes 4 times as long as a swipe or cash transaction. Not to mention in high traffic businesses (like fast food) that extra time translates to longer lines and lower sales per hour. That extra 4-6 seconds doesn't seem like much until you multiply it over hundreds of transactions across multiple stations at lunch rush.

European businesses who aren't used to being able to make their own decisions regarding their financial health aren't as bothered by this as much as us greedy Americans that like maximum profit.

---

It's mostly our own fault.

If everyone had paywave cards and terminals, small transactions would take less than a second, where only large ones would require the chips.

Americans, however, have to chew their fingernails over everything. It's like everyone's 85 years old in this country when it comes to technology.