Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'pin'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 7 results

  1. A few days ago a vitally important judgment was released concerning (once again) the matter of Liability Order 'costs'. This particular case was an appeal and was heard in the High Court but unlike in the recent case of the Reverend Nicolson, this particular local authority (East Northamptonshire District Council) had prepared a schedule of standardised costs of the type encouraged by Judge Andrews in the Reverend's case (paragraph 46). The claimant; Edward Williams represented himself and his appeal concerned (amongst other points) the following: One: That the summons served was an abuse of process because within it, it included an amount of costs (£75). He contended that the Regulations make no provision for the summons to include an amount by way of costs and that costs could only become due once, and if, a liability order were made Two: That including the amount of costs on the face of the summons was an abuse because it was an unlawful demand for money which the local authority had no right to make at that time. He contended that the costs were not due and owing at the date of the summons. He pointed out that the complaint on which the summons was based made no reference to the costs of £75. He submitted that it was an unfair manipulation of the Court process to include an amount for costs on the face of the summons, particularly when the only real summons cost was £3. He suggested that the recipient of a summons would be misled into believing that the costs of £75 were fixed and could not be debated or challenged. Three: He wanted to appeal the earlier decision regarding the sum of £75 and whether the costs had been 'reasonably incurred'. Most importantly; (and this is of significance to all local authorities who had been waiting for this case to be heard), Mr Williams considered that when compiling a schedule of costs, East Northamptonshire Council were wrong to include figures for: Information and Technology costs. Chip and Pin costs. Pension deficit funding.
  2. While I was withdrawing money from ATM, Suddenly two persons came from my back side and one of them cancelled my transaction and I asked why you are cancelling my transaction. He replied that This ATM is not working and the other guy also said the same. I thought ATM is not working and my card has been stuck in the machine. Immediately I have called bank and got to know from customer care representative that some dispute transactions worth 2500£ (300£ refunded by bank as they withdrawn this amount at ATM) were made on my card and I have cancelled my card. I went to Local police station and suggested to report in actionafraud.police.uk and suggested to wait till the bank response. I am really worrying whether the bank will refund my money for these disputed transactions? OR do I need to go for Police/Court?
  3. Hello! I would be really grateful if I could get some advice please! I had a tenancy inspection 28days ago and there were a few issues that they kicked off about (hairdye on the toilet seat etc!) One of them was that some of the lightbulbs needed replacing - however the light fittings in the property are 3 pin energy saving which cost between £10-£13 each and 5 of them all went over the Christmas period. We simply can not afford to replace them all - more like 1 a month at the moment!! Can we be evicted for something like this? I though I had read something a while ago about 'non'standard fittings' and gave these lightbulbs as an example, but I can't be sure. Any advice would be much appreciated
  4. When you purchase an item via chip & pin is authorisation sought immediately? I have been told today that on occasion the retailer can process the payment without authorisation. Is this the case? I'd appreciate any advice on this, thanks in advance.
  5. An estimated 21m cards could be at risk of fraud as research finds that 12pc of bank customers have made a note of their Pin and carried it with their card in the past year. The figure was 9pc in 2011, representing is an increase of a third in just a year, according to research by ACI, a payment systems company. Of those surveyed, 16pc admitted to throwing bank statements or ATM receipts into the bin, compared with 15pc last year. Eight per cent said they didn't use security software when shopping or banking online – and often did so on a public computer – but this is a fall from 10pc last year. The survey also found that nearly two thirds of people who have been the victim of fraud involving credit cards, debit cards or prepaid cards during the past five years lost more than £100. Of them, 17pc lost between £101 and £200, 22pc £201 to £500, 13pc £501 to £1,000 and 11pc over £1,000. The research comes at a time when banks are clamping down on refunding fraud losses if it can be proved that not enough care was taken by a consumer to protect themselves from becoming a victim of fraud. Actions such as using a "weak" Pin or failing to shield their Pin at a cashpoint could mean that consumers will lose out if they attempt to get a refund when they lose money after being targeted by fraudsters. Mike Braatz of ACI urged consumers to protect themselves against fraud: “It’s a worrying fact that so many people are still carrying their Pin with their cards," he said. “Consumers can and should be part of the fraud prevention process. The findings help highlight the need for banks and trade bodies to do more to educate consumers about protecting their cards. Link; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/banking/9721861/One-in-10-carries-Pin-with-their-card.html
  6. I have recently bought a new LG Tv 47LM620T-ZE but I am concerned. There is no PIN number option to prevent children from accessing the internet on the TV via LG wi-fi dongle or from theVirgin Media Superhub plugged into the back of the tv. The LG tv company are absolutely refusing to do anything about this even though I have written to them on numerous times. Where do I stand on this and what does the law say about this?
  7. We all carry debit cards, credit cards and mobile phones, and most of these items require a four digit pin to unlock them. Shockingly, it appears that one in every 10 people uses the same pin – 1234. Theoretically, there are 10,000 possible four-digit combinations the numbers 0 to 9 can be arranged into, and if everyone selected a number entirely at random that would offer a reasonable level of protection. People, however, seem to exhibit a staggering lack of imagination and select very predictable numbers. This is probably because people choose numbers that are easy to remember, but this unoriginality leaves them vulnerable. Recently, I performed detailed analysis on 3.4m four-digit pins that had been exposed online: you can see the full details of the research here. The table below shows the top 20 pin numbers in use. 1234 accounts for 10.7% of all pins, followed by 1111 and 0000. Just these three combinations account for 18.6% of pins and the most common 20 combinations are responsible for more than a quarter of all pins in use. Statistically, to get a third of all pins you'd need to try just 61 combinations, and to guess half would require only 426 distinct combinations. The most common numbers are repeating patterns, couplets and straights, but also high on the frequency charts are years (all the 19xx numbers occur in the top 20% of all pin numbers), as well as significant dates (1984 and 2001, for example) and popular culture references: in homage to James Bond, 0070 and 0007 also appear very high in the charts. Also significant are keyboard patterns, such as 2580, which is a "straight-shot" down the middle of a keypad, and "across the corners" combinations are similarly popular. What appear to be birthdays or anniversaries are present in the dataset in both the European format (DDMM) and American format (MMDD), and this is a another security pit as these are easy for a potential thief to obtain. In America, a driver's licence, which everyone carries in their wallet with their ATM card, contains birthday information providing a thief with both the lock and key in the same location. If you have difficulty remembering a pin and elect to use a birth date, at least use that of your spouse. At the other end of the scale, the least frequently used number I found in my dataset was 8068. Out of all the combinations of numbers this appeared to be the least interesting. It's not a date in history, it's not a pattern, it's not a birthday, it's not easy to type. It's the perfect pin … or it would have been until now. If your pin appears in the top 20 I suggest you go and find your own uninteresting number. http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/blog/2012/sep/28/debit-cards-currentaccounts
×
×
  • Create New...