Recent cases have raised questions about the safety of chip and pin cards from fraudulent attack, for example by cloning. Typically, in such cases, the claimant is an individual whose account has been debited as a result of one or more allegedly unauthorised card transactions; the defendant is a bank or building society.
Recent cases have raised questions about the safety of chip and pin cards from fraudulent attack, for example by cloning.
Typically, in such cases, the claimant is an individual whose account has been debited as a result of one or more allegedly unauthorised card transactions; the defendant is a bank or building society.
A common counterclaim for damages for breach of contract is that the claimant did not observe the security conditions attached to the card and so made it possible for it to be used fraudulently.
In such cases, at least one disputed transaction has taken place. The question before a court is which of four possible explanations is the most likely, although they may not all be mutually exclusive:
A thief has stolen the money
