[17994] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: ID "theft" -- so what?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alan Barrett)
Mon Jul 25 11:49:38 2005
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:47:39 +0200
From: Alan Barrett <apb@cequrux.com>
To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.4.61.0507221342190.20400@frame>
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, Jerrold Leichter wrote:
> The banks, operating through the clearing agents, could if they wished
> impose a requirement on the way names appear in billing statements,
> regardless of how the names appear on contracts. Alternatively,
> they could at least require that an end-user-familiar name be made
> available in whatever database records all merchants, which the banks
> obviously have access to.
A bank once told me that it was impossible for them to convert from an
unintelligible name on a credit card statement into any other kind of
name whatsoever (and certainly not into an end-user-familiar name),
and impossible for them to show me a copy of any document whatsoever
that might be related to the charge; however, they said that if I
repudiated the charge, then they could get a copy of the voucher
or other documents. So I repudiated the charge, but the bank was
still unable or unwilling to show me the promised copies of relevant
documents. The merchant eventually contacted me about the repudiated
charge.
--apb (Alan Barrett)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
