Random Fail: First World Problems

[Kohan]

Except that stores and their clerks don't care about fraud unless they get caught flaking off and have to pay for the fraud in lost merchandise and/or repayment of funds/fines. Go stand near a register for an hour and watch how many times the clerk doesn't do things to guard against fraud.

So, Dick or not, he is not the one allowing people to make fraudulent purchases. Don't get on your soap box and talk about "fraud protection". Retail stores only have fraud prevention policies because they are required to. They also have insurance and agreements with their bank (who is making money hand over fist from them) to cover any losses from fraud...they simply don't give a damn.

*The above was a sweeping generalization about retail stores.*

They only have fraud policies because they are "required to"? What the fuck kind of retarded-ass comment is that? Yeah, they're required to, but do you know why? Insurance is indeed one reason, but the whole fucking point is to discourage or, ideally, prevent fraudulent transactions. Competent managers train their employees, and incompetent ones don't, but the latter group doesn't make anti-fraud practices irrelevant. Constant, standardized implementation eventually ensures a more widespread adherence to proper procedures, whereas crying about cases of ignorance does a whole lot of nothing.

As you've said, your comment was a generalization, and a stupid one at that. You can't even blame the employees directly, as their managers are probably in the incompetent camp, and didn't train them. In fact, the majority of the people in this world—not even just this country, mind you—believe that having people check your ID is a perfectly viable and normal method of fraud prevention. Instead, it's a contributor. Did you know that? If you did, congratulations. If you didn't, fuck you, as you're not any smarter than the managers who didn't train their employees, not to mention the employees themselves.

It isn't a "soap box," as my opinion on their being fucking idiots aside, everything I've mentioned is true. They're dicks for crying about a process as if they know what they're talking about when they're fucking clueless.

As for my own familiarity with fraud practices, I've trained dozens of people in them, have run multiple high volume retail stores, have dealt with creditors directly, and so on. It isn't as if my crews were the only ones conducting proper transactions, either, as I see it every day. Hell, just this afternoon, I bought some sushi, and the clerk held my credit card until I signed the receipt, compared them, and then handed it back to me. They didn't ask for my ID. They handled the situation correctly, they're probably a minimum wage earner, and they aren't unique. Most restaurants that take your credit cards away do the same thing. Truthfully, you probably do business with people who run your card correctly every Goddamn day, but you don't even think about it.

Now, not thinking about it? That's fine. If life's running smoothly, you shouldn't have to dwell on every little thing. However, crying like an entitled cunt when you're in the fucking wrong doesn't just make you a dick (as the aforementioned so brilliantly demonstrated themselves to be), but it makes you out to be the true idiot.

Don't excuse them for being stupid fucks, or you'll become part of their retard party.

I am so confused by this post. You said that someone was complaining about places that don't take cards that are missing a signature or "See ID", but the only people complaining are people talking about no one checking ID even when the card is obviously not yours. Then you say that writing "See ID" on your credit card is fraud. Then you say checking ID leads to more fraud and that not checking for ID is actually an anti-fraud practice. Am I reading this wrong?

I don't know what you're having trouble understanding, as everything you've said is accurate. Checking an ID is wrong. You are not supposed to do it. The majority of people believe it is correct, and think it's a good business practice, but it is not. While I comply when cashiers ask me, I know it's wrong of them to do so, but I also understand that it's unfortunately a widely-held belief that they should be. I won't change the industry by being an insufferable cock in a coffee shop, but I also won't cry about being done a terrible disservice when I'm a fucking idiot. (Not to say that you've been, by the way, as curiosity is not idiocy.)

Therefore, the card user is wrong in cases wherein they've not signed their card or have written "See ID" in the signature field. I never said that "See ID" itself is fraud, but it can be a contributor to fraud, as it encourages people to ask for your ID, which—as mentioned, again—you're not supposed to provide.

A vendor's responsibility begins and ends at ensuring that the signature on the credit card and receipt are identical, the exception being whenever they're conducting a transaction with an amount beneath the minimum that their insurance company will cover (e.g., $20). They are not supposed to check for ID, and they are only supposed to accept cards with a valid signature.

[Acevalefor]

They only have fraud policies because they are "required to"? What the fuck kind of retarded-ass comment is that? Yeah, they're required to, but do you know why? Insurance is indeed one reason, but the whole fucking point is to discourage or, ideally, prevent fraudulent transactions. Competent managers train their employees, and incompetent ones don't, but the latter group doesn't make anti-fraud practices irrelevant. Constant, standardized implementation eventually ensures a more widespread adherence to proper procedures, whereas crying about cases of ignorance does a whole lot of nothing.

As you've said, your comment was a generalization, and a stupid one at that. You can't even blame the employees directly, as their managers are probably in the incompetent camp, and didn't train them. In fact, the majority of the people in this world—not even just this country, mind you—believe that having people check your ID is a perfectly viable and normal method of fraud prevention. Instead, it's a contributor. Did you know that? If you did, congratulations. If you didn't, fuck you, as you're not any smarter than the managers who didn't train their employees, not to mention the employees themselves.

It isn't a "soap box," as my opinion on their being fucking idiots aside, everything I've mentioned is true. They're dicks for crying about a process as if they know what they're talking about when they're fucking clueless.

As for my own familiarity with fraud practices, I've trained dozens of people in them, have run multiple high volume retail stores, have dealt with creditors directly, and so on. It isn't as if my crews were the only ones conducting proper transactions, either, as I see it every day. Hell, just this afternoon, I bought some sushi, and the clerk held my credit card until I signed the receipt, compared them, and then handed it back to me. They didn't ask for my ID. They handled the situation correctly, they're probably a minimum wage earner, and they aren't unique. Most restaurants that take your credit cards away do the same thing. Truthfully, you probably do business with people who run your card correctly every Goddamn day, but you don't even think about it.

Now, not thinking about it? That's fine. If life's running smoothly, you shouldn't have to dwell on every little thing. However, crying like an entitled cunt when you're in the fucking wrong doesn't just make you a dick (as the aforementioned so brilliantly demonstrated themselves to be), but it makes you out to be the true idiot.

Don't excuse them for being stupid fucks, or you'll become part of their retard party.



I don't know what you're having trouble understanding, as everything you've said is accurate. Checking an ID is wrong. You are not supposed to do it. The majority of people believe it is correct, and think it's a good business practice, but it is not. While I comply when cashiers ask me, I know it's wrong of them to do so, but I also understand that it's unfortunately a widely-held belief that they should be. I won't change the industry by being an insufferable cock in a coffee shop, but I also won't cry about being done a terrible disservice when I'm a fucking idiot. (Not to say that you've been, by the way, as curiosity is not idiocy.)

Therefore, the card user is wrong in cases wherein they've not signed their card or have written "See ID" in the signature field. I never said that "See ID" itself is fraud, but it can be a contributor to fraud, as it encourages people to ask for your ID, which—as mentioned, again—you're not supposed to provide.

A vendor's responsibility begins and ends at ensuring that the signature on the credit card and receipt are identical, the exception being whenever they're conducting a transaction with an amount beneath the minimum that their insurance company will cover (e.g., $20). They are not supposed to check for ID, and they are only supposed to accept cards with a valid signature.

You keep believing whatever you want. The bottom line is that major corporations don't give a fuck about fraud prevention beyond simple steps that are required by insurance and state/federal laws. There is more money spent training and maintaining complex fraud prevention policies (See Macy's) than what they lose to fraudulent transactions. When any one company or sector sees that change, they add new policies to make the shareholders and board members happy. That's the bottom line. There is no idea of crime prevention. They are simply out there to make that net gain number look the best they can.

It's the same with store theft. Safeway (Also Randall's in other parts of the country) doesn't even pursue people that walk out of their store with stolen merchandise. They are not allowed to do anything at all. There is a report written and filed in the "who fucking cares" folder and reported to the police to deal with or not deal with as they see fit. Because, again there is more risk of legal costs than what anyone could possibly cost them in lost merchandise.

It's really not that hard to understand the almighty dollar. Your experience as a low end manager does not mean you understand why and how retailers do things. It just means you follow orders and train people according to the policies written in your handy manual. Which is written and given to you because they have to meet minimum requirements as mentioned above (including keeping board members and shareholders happy).

[Byrthnoth]

You keep believing whatever you want. The bottom line is that major corporations don't give a fuck about fraud prevention beyond simple steps that are required by insurance and state/federal laws.

This is not true as it applies to credit cards. Chargebacks are the consumer's revenge against unauthorized charges. Stores that don't pay attention to credit card fraud lose money in the form of large fraudulent charges that end in chargebacks.


Is McDonald's really in danger of losing its shirt to fraudsters buying 99 cent burgers? No, not really, but it's a dick move to buy a 99 cent burger with a credit card that has a bum magnetic strip.

Is NewEgg in danger of losing its shirt to fraudsters buying thousands of dollars worth of consumer components with phished info? Yeah, that's why they call your billing address phone number to get you to confirm the purchase if you buy anything big on their site.


Credit Cards give much more power to the consumer when it comes to disputing charges than other forms of payment (checks, debit cards, etc.)

[Acevalefor]

This is not true as it applies to credit cards. Chargebacks are the consumer's revenge against unauthorized charges. Stores that don't pay attention to credit card fraud lose money in the form of large fraudulent charges that end in chargebacks.


Is McDonald's really in danger of losing its shirt to fraudsters buying 99 cent burgers? No, not really, but it's a dick move to buy a 99 cent burger with a credit card that has a bum magnetic strip.

Is NewEgg in danger of losing its shirt to fraudsters buying thousands of dollars worth of consumer components with phished info? Yeah, that's why they call your billing address phone number to get you to confirm the purchase if you buy anything big on their site.


Credit Cards give much more power to the consumer when it comes to disputing charges than other forms of payment (checks, debit cards, etc.)

Again, there are times when the bottom line is impacted. But high volume, low cost retailers (Wal-mart, Dick's, Grocery stores, Spencer's, etc.) simply don't have to worry about it very often.

Kohan's assertion is, first of all, that name calling makes the internet take him seriously, and second that stores jump all over even the slightest hint that there might be fraud and any clerk that doesn't jump on the crime fighting superhero bus is just an idiot or has been trained by an idiot.

Back to Safeway example; Their solution to theft and fraud is to just raise the prices of their goods to cover the average loss they take and make the consumer pay for it. Makes everyone happy. The consumer is too dumb to understand they are paying for the thieves to get free shit, and the store isn't losing anything.

Internet retailers are a different story because of the incredibly high % of fraud that happens in the world of an unregulated worldwide virtual market. If you play in that world, a huge part of making money is ensuring that buyers feel safe giving you their information and that fraudsters are disinclined to defraud you.

[Aksannyi]

Jesus fucking Christ can this be split from the main topic already, I keep reading this thread for random fails, not the same bullshit argument about credit card fraud prevention which I really don't give two fucks about.

[Melena]

I'm amazed Ace hasn't realized that it costs a store less in losses from someone shoplifting versus a charge back. On a chargeback, not only do they lose the sale, but Visa/MC/AMEX etc. penalize the company.

As for fails, yesterday I forgot the night before I actually had a parking space on the first floor of the garage and took the elevator to the second floor, just in time to realize that yes, my car was on the first floor.

[Eurell]

http://i.iflip.im/19uk.jpg

[Kerberoz]

Jesus fucking Christ can this be split from the main topic already, I keep reading this thread for random fails, not the same bullshit argument about credit card fraud prevention which I really don't give two fucks about.

this.

[Sepukku]

Jesus fucking Christ can this be split from the main topic already, I keep reading this thread for random fails, not the same bullshit argument about credit card fraud prevention which I really don't give two fucks about.

The fail part of this all is they're bitching about a credit card over half the world is too poor and too isolated from a developed financial market to get.

[Anoat]

Not mine personally, but a FB friend of mine was complaining about being bruised up from riding around on her jet ski on the lake this weekend. I made some snide first world problems joke and nobody liked it!

[Kerberoz]

First world problem: "No one laughed at my first world problem joke!"

[Acturus]

Is cancer a first world problem? Because a coworker's husband, whom I'm fairly close to, was just diagnosed with stage 4 something-or-other-oma. A week ago, he was at my son's soccer game, complaining about back pain, three days ago, he has stage 4 cancer, and its in both lungs and in his bones.

The fuck.

[BaneTheBrawler]

well that fucking sucks.

[Brill Weave]

Is cancer a first world problem? Because a coworker's husband, whom I'm fairly close to, was just diagnosed with stage 4 something-or-other-oma. A week ago, he was at my son's soccer game, complaining about back pain, three days ago, he has stage 4 cancer, and its in both lungs and in his bones.

The fuck.

That's how my father was diagnosed. He kept experiencing severe back pain.

[Myrrh_Quetz]

Good lord, I could imagine my luck being something like that. I'm in constant back pain.

[Milkster]

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-...02251852_n.jpg

My life.

[BaneTheBrawler]

He can't be both?

[Ganondorf]

Just clicked the link for the FoD: Cocks Galore Edition thread thinking it was regular FoD. I read an entire paragraph about some dude's mission to find an anal vibrator he really likes. I feel awkward.

[Qalbert]

http://cdn.bluegartr.com/customavata...tar34249_1.gif

[Ganondorf]

Well played, but fuck you anyway.