People Opposed to Contacless Payments - Why?

[Bletchleyite]

A few days ago I bought a £10 item at a builders merchants using Chip and PIN. The machine took about a minute to clear the purchase, displaying "Authorising ...". The guy serving said "It's always slow". Now here is a question for the contactless guys - If I'd used contactless, would there still have been that delay?

Yes. In fact, it is more likely to take that amount of time with contactless, as an authorisation is mandatory for all contactless transactions (other than transit mode where the sum is calculated later, i.e. the TfL application) but the retailer can, at their risk, not bother for C&P transactions, though these days almost all retailers authorise almost all transactions as it's a small time penalty and guarantees they are paid.

Seems to me there is no technical reason for C&P transactions under £30 to go through slower than contactless ones, once the buttons have been pressed (which for me is about 2 seconds, if that). It would only be because of bank policy requiring authorisation even for small amounts that makes C&P otherwise slower : I therefore wonder if this is a conspiracy to discourage C&P for an artificial reason, deliberately making it slow for C&P users..

This is not the case; the case is actually the direct opposite as outlined above.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Targeted advertising does seem preferable to random stuff.

I prefer none, and am happy to pay for none (along the lines that the TV licence is only a small price to pay for 3 TV channels, countless radio stations and other resources with none at all). I do find it a shame that is rarely offered.

(I don't mind banner ads like this site uses - but anything beyond that is grossly irritating)

 

[jon0844]

Web based adverts are usually annoying because they can massively slow down browsing, but I'm not against small unintrusive ads.

 

[whhistle]

Targeted advertising does seem preferable to random stuff.

Where as I'd prefer an advert to display something competely irrelevent.
It takes my brain less time to process whether that ad is worth looking at when it's irrelevent.

Just because I have been looking at the DFS website, doesn't mean I want to see ads on every page I visit. I came away from the DFS website because it was no longer interesting. No ad is going to entice me back within the same browsing session.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where as I'd prefer an advert to display something competely irrelevent.
It takes my brain less time to process whether that ad is worth looking at when it's irrelevent.

Just because I have been looking at the DFS website, doesn't mean I want to see ads on every page I visit. I came away from the DFS website because it was no longer interesting. No ad is going to entice me back within the same browsing session.

99% of the targetted ads I get are for something I've already bought.

 

[Strat-tastic]

I don't want to be 'targeted' thank you very much. Who does!

 

[Mutant Lemming]

How many jobs have been lost as a result of contactless payments ? ...from those who count and account for the cash, the banknote manufacturers, till operators, security van firms, security van attacking criminal gangs, more Sweeney to tackle the gangs... etc etc etc.. with an ever expanding population and an ever decreasing role for that population one wonders what employment people will have in order to furnish those contactless accounts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How many jobs have been lost as a result of contactless payments ? ...from those who count and account for the cash, the banknote manufacturers, till operators, security van firms, security van attacking criminal gangs, more Sweeney to tackle the gangs... etc etc etc.. with an ever expanding population and an ever decreasing role for that population one wonders what employment people will have in order to furnish those contactless accounts.

This is the standard anti-IT argument, but it completely ignores the multi-billion-pound global industry that develops and supports it.

 

[cactustwirly]

This is the standard anti-IT argument, but it completely ignores the multi-billion-pound global industry that develops and supports it.

Exactly, what about the jobs created through the manufacturing and support of the chip and pin terminals?

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Exactly, what about the jobs created through the manufacturing and support of the chip and pin terminals?

… yes but they aren't 'real' jobs - even the (cyber) criminals just sit at home and don't get out. The thing is what are all the redundant people going to do though ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

… yes but they aren't 'real' jobs - even the (cyber) criminals just sit at home and don't get out. The thing is what are all the redundant people going to do though ?

What do you mean by "real" jobs? My IT job is very real. I do work and get paid for it. Just because I don't have to crack out a pickaxe to do it?

 

[Mutant Lemming]

What do you mean by "real" jobs? My IT job is very real. I do work and get paid for it. Just because I don't have to crack out a pickaxe to do it?

I was being lightly sarcastic - my point is more that the amount of jobs created falls short of the ever increasing global population.

 

[cactustwirly]

I was being lightly sarcastic - my point is more that the amount of jobs created falls short of the ever increasing global population.

It's called progress, without which we'd be all living on medieval farms, milking cows etc.
The same thing happened with victorian chimney sweeps or firemen in steam locos!

 

[Mutant Lemming]

It's called progress, without which we'd be all living on medieval farms, milking cows etc.
The same thing happened with victorian chimney sweeps or firemen in steam locos!

Blind progress without thought for the consequences has actually left half the planet in the very circumstances you state.

 

[Lucan]

Yes. In fact, it is more likely to take that amount of time with contactless, as an authorisation is mandatory for all contactless transactions ... but the retailer can, at their risk, not bother for C&P transactions, though these days almost all retailers authorise almost all transactions as it's a small time penalty and guarantees they are paid.

Thanks for that info. When I was commuting, a common sight was guys running for a train and grabbing a newspaper from the kiosk, not even stopping, without a word, leaving a 50p coin (or whatever the cost was, they had the coins prepared) on the pile in its place. The kiosk owner was perfectly happy with this custom.

I had assumed that you could do a similar thing with contactless. If however you need to wait for authorisation it seems that most of the potential speed advantage of contactless does not exist. As I said, the time spent pressing five buttons is negligable compared with "Waiting for Authorisation" at some shops. Of course, there are always customers who hold up the queue by mistyping or even fogetting their PIN as soon as they come to enter it.

 

[Lucan]

contactless? no thanks. too easy to get ripped off.

That's a bit vague. My concern is the contactless card getting pick-pocketed, stolen, or I drop it; and then used several times (possibly many times) before I notice and notify the bank to stop it(and need a huge argument with them if it is not straight away). It is worse than carrying cash for me as I would normally carry less than £30. A contactless card would be better for a thief than my cash.

I remember when credit cards were being pushed as a new thing, and one of the great advantages was claimed to be an end to mugging, which had reached a high point. Now, contactless cards make mugging a going concern again, those and mobile phones.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's a bit vague. My concern is the contactless card getting pick-pocketed, stolen, or I drop it; and then used several times (possibly many times) before I notice and notify the bank to stop it(and need a huge argument with them if it is not straight away). It is worse than carrying cash for me as I would normally carry less than £30. A contactless card would be better for a thief than my cash.

I remember when credit cards were being pushed as a new thing, and one of the great advantages was claimed to be an end to mugging, which had reached a high point. Now, contactless cards make mugging a going concern again, those and mobile phones.

Why would you not notice your card being pickpocketed, stolen or lost? I'd respectfully suggest that if you feel you wouldn't you need to be more careful, such as keeping it in a substantial wallet which you can feel in your pocket while it's there rather than loose.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thanks for that info. When I was commuting, a common sight was guys running for a train and grabbing a newspaper from the kiosk, not even stopping, without a word, leaving a 50p coin (or whatever the cost was, they had the coins prepared) on the pile in its place. The kiosk owner was perfectly happy with this custom.

I had assumed that you could do a similar thing with contactless. If however you need to wait for authorisation it seems that most of the potential speed advantage of contactless does not exist. As I said, the time spent pressing five buttons is negligable compared with "Waiting for Authorisation" at some shops. Of course, there are always customers who hold up the queue by mistyping or even fogetting their PIN as soon as they come to enter it.

Yeah, that sort of thing is a use-case for cash. Though I suppose there are other ways round it if cash was to disappear, such as a newspaper stand you use daily offering some kind of tokens purchased in bulk by card. Or even take a subscription to the newspaper - they often offer pre-paid (discounted) voucher schemes which can be used in exactly that manner.

 

[DelW]

There are circumstances when I prefer not to have any bank cards with me. Yes, if I drop my wallet or have it stolen, I have a cash loss, but IMO that's simpler to deal with than having to get cards cancelled and re-issued.

I also check my statement every month to be sure that I recognise all the transactions on it. Because I use cash for all my small payments, and contact payment for the large ones, there are (relatively) few to check, and I should have the receipt for any I've forgotten. If I were using contactless instead of cash for the small payments, the statement would be many times longer and the chance of me spotting an unauthorised transaction would be that much less. I have had occasional unauthorised card debits in the past, which may colour my view - I had them corrected, but only because I spotted them and queried them with the bank.

 

[PeterC]

There are circumstances when I prefer not to have any bank cards with me. Yes, if I drop my wallet or have it stolen, I have a cash loss, but IMO that's simpler to deal with than having to get cards cancelled and re-issued.

I also check my statement every month to be sure that I recognise all the transactions on it. Because I use cash for all my small payments, and contact payment for the large ones, there are (relatively) few to check, and I should have the receipt for any I've forgotten. If I were using contactless instead of cash for the small payments, the statement would be many times longer and the chance of me spotting an unauthorised transaction would be that much less. I have had occasional unauthorised card debits in the past, which may colour my view - I had them corrected, but only because I spotted them and queried them with the bank.

With SWMBO in hospital recently I had been using contactless a lot more than usual as I didn't want to take time out to detour to a cashpoint. The effect on my bank statement was quite dramatic.

It made me think back to my days as a bank clerk in the 70s and the charges that one customer incurred who would take tiny amounts of cash out two or three times a day. If we ever get rid of cash I can just see the banks going back to the old system of charging per transaction.

 

[Lucan]

If we ever get rid of cash I can just see the banks going back to the old system of charging per transaction.

I thought they did already. For every credit, debit and contactless transaction, they get a percentage cut, which they don't for cash. That is one reason they want to do away with cash*. Personally, I think bankers are rich enough already without me adding to their pockets, which is partly why I stick to using cash for smaller amounts.

* The other reason of course is to collect info on your purchasing habits, which they can sell to marketeers.

 

[gswindale]

I thought they did already. For every credit, debit and contactless transaction, they get a percentage cut, which they don't for cash. That is one reason they want to do away with cash*. Personally, I think bankers are rich enough already without me adding to their pockets, which is partly why I stick to using cash for smaller amounts.

* The other reason of course is to collect info on your purchasing habits, which they can sell to marketeers.

Incorrect.

Cash transactions tend to cost retailers more than debit/credit card payments (or at least they did a few years back when I had dealings with a Shopping Centre and their car park). This is due to security requirements transporting the cash, staff costs involved in counting the coins/notes etc.

These fees are all factored in to your business banking agreements.

 

[sprunt]

Cash transactions tend to cost retailers more than debit/credit card payments (or at least they did a few years back when I had dealings with a Shopping Centre and their car park). This is due to security requirements transporting the cash, staff costs involved in counting the coins/notes etc.

Banks charge business users a percentage on cash deposits too, don't they?

 

[cjp]

Banks charge business users a percentage on cash deposits too, don't they?

Yes.
This is a reason why so many places are happy to offer cashback.

 

[PeterC]

I thought they did already. For every credit, debit and contactless transaction, they get a percentage cut, which they don't for cash. That is one reason they want to do away with cash*. Personally, I think bankers are rich enough already without me adding to their pockets, which is partly why I stick to using cash for smaller amounts.

* The other reason of course is to collect info on your purchasing habits, which they can sell to marketeers.

Up until the late 70s they had two bites of the cherry by charging the private customer for issuing the cheque and the business for paying it in.

Yes cash is expensive for large business users but the small business may use more of their cash rather than pay it in, I doubt very much that the barmaids at my local would be paid by bank transfer. Without cash the banks get to gouge a percentage out of every person to person transaction as well.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I doubt very much that the barmaids at my local would be paid by bank transfer

If they aren't, I think you can work out for yourself why they aren't. And that (tax evasion and crime) is the primary reason for wanting rid of cash.

 

[cjp]

If they aren't, I think you can work out for yourself why they aren't. And that (tax evasion and crime) is the primary reason for wanting rid of cash.

I think you are perhaps too suspicious. If a place has load of cash it is not hard to pay a person in cash rather than bank it and a wage slip is not hard for person to produce with all the small accounting packages around furthermore HMRC would be raising eyebrows at pubs with no wage bills.

I use cash for most things and it sometimes saves me trifle - for instance I pay my car servicing bills in cash and a get the usual huge printed VAT invoice but if the charge is for say £323.74 and I give them £325 I might get back £2 as they have no change and the detailed bill is made out to £323.00 not £323.74

 

[Busaholic]

Incorrect.

Cash transactions tend to cost retailers more than debit/credit card payments (or at least they did a few years back when I had dealings with a Shopping Centre and their car park). This is due to security requirements transporting the cash, staff costs involved in counting the coins/notes etc.

These fees are all factored in to your business banking agreements.

I can only speak as a small retailer for thirty years, but we were always charged far more for credit and debit card purchases than for depositing cash into a business bank account. I was very glad to retire before Visa insisted that any retailer taking their cards had to accept contactless - it got as far as receiving letters to that effect that it was coming in: I seem to remember the cut-off date was this year, but I could be wrong or the 'rule' might have been amended/put back.

I'm implacably against contactless, by the way, knowing I'm in good company with the head of the National Fraud Office and the Chief Cashier of the Bank of England, whose opinions on the subject I value rather more than some on this forum!

 

[underbank]

Banks charge business users a percentage on cash deposits too, don't they?

Depends on the bank. Eg, A Co-Op bank account through FSB allows cash banking free of charge at Post Office branches up to pretty high limits.

 

[underbank]

99% of the targetted ads I get are for something I've already bought.

Yep, I find that hilarious too. The advertisers are paying to display banners to people who've already bought it, sometimes even bought their own product. Just booked a cruise through MSC, today, there are MSC banners on virtually all fora and other websites I've been using - completely pointless as I won't be buying another. Same the other day, I bought a new DSLR camera from Amazon - for a few days, there were nothing but Amazon camera banner ads. You'd think they'd design cookies that could flag up when an item had been bought so they don't display advs to people who've made the purchase and concentrate advs on those who havn't.