🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5560@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>, willis@violet.berkeley.edu (Willis Johnson) writes:

> You guessed it.  I lost mine and somebody used it. I won't tell
> you where they found the PIN! :-)  The guy used it four times to
> withdraw a total of $520 from my account.  The ATMs took a total
> of 18 clear photos of him. [...]

	What is *REALLY* incredible is that the fellow was so stupid as
to withdraw money using a stolen card and allow his face to be videotaped.
Of course, your typical crook is not too bright (or he'd be a politician 
and rip off more money, legally).

	Since the vid-cameras the ATMs have are pretty conspicuous, and
they aren't crew served, I don't see what they can do if someone walks
up wearing a big hat, stocking mask, or motorcycle helmet, and withdraws
money.

	In fact, I usually don't bother to take my full-face (smoked visor)
helmet off when I withdraw money, simply because I resent being on camera
when there are no signs to notify me that I am being recorded. Banks are
quite straightforward about this, and I appreciate it.

--mjr();
-- 
If they think you're crude, go technical; if they think you're technical,
go crude. I'm a very technical boy. So I get as crude as possible. These
days, though, you have to be pretty technical before you can even aspire
to crudeness...			         -Johnny Mnemonic

In article <5560@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> willis@violet.berkeley.edu (Willis Johnson) writes:
>You guessed it.  I lost mine and somebody used it. I won't tell
>you where they found the PIN! :-)  The guy used it four times to
>withdraw a total of $520 from my account.  The ATMs took a total
>of 18 clear photos of him.  They looked like offprints from a video
>tape.  We identified him from the pictures and the Berkeley Police
>inform me that those pictures are admissible evidence in California.

	I have always known what's behind those plastic "windows"
at every ATM. It's alota fun poking faces at them. If the Machine
doesn't somethime I'd taped a piece of flyer on them just to piss
someone off. I just don't get it when someone is smart enough
to use other people's bank card and not smart enough to
cover the camera before screwing around with the machine.


Fai  Lau
SUNY at Buffalo (The Arctic Wonderland)
UUCP: ..{mit-ems|watmath|rocksanne}!sunybcs!ugfailau
BI: ugfailau@sunybcs

In article <6252@sunybcs.UUCP>, ugfailau@sunybcs.uucp (Fai Lau) writes:
> In article <5560@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> willis@violet.berkeley.edu (Willis Johnson) writes:
> >You guessed it.  I lost mine and somebody used it. I won't tell
> >you where they found the PIN! :-)  The guy used it four times to
> >withdraw a total of $520 from my account.  The ATMs took a total
> >of 18 clear photos of him.  They looked like offprints from a video
> >tape.  We identified him from the pictures and the Berkeley Police
> >inform me that those pictures are admissible evidence in California.
> 
> 	I have always known what's behind those plastic "windows"
> at every ATM. It's alota fun poking faces at them. If the Machine
> doesn't somethime I'd taped a piece of flyer on them just to piss
> someone off. I just don't get it when someone is smart enough
> to use other people's bank card and not smart enough to
> cover the camera before screwing around with the machine.
> 

My sister goes to UCB and had an ATM card for Wells Fargo Bank. She
also lives in the dorms there and someone down the hall managed to lift
her card from her room in one of those poddy panics that students high
on caffeen get every 15 minutes or so. Anyway, they managed to get a
few hundred dollars from her account (How they figured out the PIN I'll
never know) and they almost got away with it.

Apparently Wells Farge doesn't take pictures unless there is a flag on 
your card account. She went down to the Bank two days later when she
finally figured out it wasn't in the laundry or under the chemistry
book and they informed her that it had been used in the last few
days. After that they put the mark on her account and they caught the
guy as he drained the last of her savings out of her account...

The big problem is that even though they did catch the thief and convict
him, my sister only got back the money that she had lost after they
had turned on the cameras. She didn't get any of the other money back
even though the guy admitted to the crime...

Now I ask you, is this fair? I suppose its the law, but then...

Marcos R. Della

-- 
...!lll-crg -> !csustan -\                           | Whatever I said doesn't
            ...!sdsu ----->->!polyslo!caus-dp!marcos | mean diddly as I forgot
  ...!ihnp4 -> !csun ----/                           | it even before finishing
            ...!dmsd ---/                            | typing it all out!!!

In article <284@caus-dp.UUCP> marcos@caus-dp.UUCP (Marcos R. Della) writes:
>The big problem is that even though they did catch the thief and convict
>him, my sister only got back the money that she had lost after they
>had turned on the cameras. She didn't get any of the other money back
>even though the guy admitted to the crime...
>
>Now I ask you, is this fair? I suppose its the law, but then...

If you read the card agreements on Debit cards you will notice that the
Bank is not liable unless you notify them of the theft.  This also includes
credit cards.  Once your sister alerted the bank she was covered.  This
protects the bank as well as the card holder.  Suppose the spouse of a card
holder neglected to tell the named holder that they were going to use the card
and the named holder then discovered the card missing, and reported it stolen...
well you can guess the kind of problems that could cause.

As far as it being fair... Life isn't fair... But as long as you report the
theft as soon as you discover it missing, you are covered... In her case, I
presume she was the only holder, therefore she wouldn't have harmed anything
by reporting it stolen as soon as she couldn't find it...  These cards are
great, but you do need to be careful with them.
-- 
John B. Meaders, Jr.  1114 Camino La Costa #3083, Austin, TX  78752
ATT:  Voice:  +1 (512) 451-5038  Data:  +1 (512) 371-0550
UUCP:   ...!ut-ngp!auscso!jclyde!john
                          \johnm

For credit cards, you are only responsible for the first $50 that someone
who steals your card charges.  From my "Visa(r) account agreement:"  

	If you discover or suspect that the Card or any unused checks are lost
or stolen, or that there may be an unauthorized transaction on your
account, you will notify us promptly by telephoning x.  You will
phone, even though you may notify us in writing, so we can act fast
[sic - it bothers me that the lawyers who write this can't speak
English] to limit losses and liability.  Your liability for
unauthorized use occurring before you notify us is limited to $50.

I was under the impression that this was required by law, and that
this law also applies to ATM cards.


James Moore
..!ucbvax!leggatt!jmm

 From jmm@thoth8.berkeley.edu.BERKELEY.EDU (James Moore):

	For credit cards, you are only responsible for the first $50
	that someone who steals your card charges.  . . . .

	I was under the impression that this was required by law, and
	that this law also applies to ATM cards.

Yes, this is required by law; no, the law does not apply to ATM cards.
The law provides the consumer much better protection with credit cards
than with ATM cards.  Take a look at the agreement you got with your
ATM card.
		David Booth
	Arpanet: booth@vax135.att.com
	UUCP: {harvard, seismo, ucbvax}!vax135!booth

In article <6140@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> jmm@thoth8.berkeley.edu.BERKELEY.EDU ()
writes:
>For credit cards, you are only responsible for the first $50 that someone
>who steals your card charges.  From my "Visa(r) account agreement:"  
>
>	If you discover or suspect that the Card or any unused checks are lost
>or stolen, ......
>                                     ......  Your liability for
>unauthorized use occurring before you notify us is limited to $50.
>
>I was under the impression that this was required by law, and that
>this law also applies to ATM cards.
>
>James Moore     ...!ucbvax!leggatt!jmm

No!  This is *not* the case!  In many situations, ATM cards are considered
(and implemented as) debit cards, not credit cards, and as such they are *not*
necessarily protected by the fifty dollar limit of liability.  Some states
have addressed this problem, and implemented statutes to protect the ATM card
holder against unauthorized use of his|her account.  Many banks have
voluntarily adopted policies which protect their customers.

The ATM user is hereby warned to read the fine print on the agreement -- my
bank *does* protect me with the fifty dollar limit *if* I am prompt in
reporting the loss of the card, but there is no guarantee that all banks would
do so.

-- 
 Jim Duncan, Computer Science Dept, Old Dominion Univ, Norfolk VA 23529-0162
 (804)440-3915     INET: jim@xanth.cs.odu.edu    UUCP: ...!sun!xanth!jim
 ---------- Time flies like the wind, but fruit flies like bananas. ---------