Thief sends thank you flowers to victim.

[marcusindc]

http://consumerist.com/2011/04/a-hol...to-victim.html

It's bad enough when someone finds a way to swipe your personal info to use for their own illegal purposes. But it's a special kind of jackass that has the temerity to send you a "Thank You" note after stealing your funds.

This is exactly what happened to a woman in Rhode Island, who found out that her Bank of America card had been canceled after someone racked up $2,400 in fraudulent charges.

And then to make matters worse, flowers were delivered to her house with a card that read, "thnx for ur money."

[deputymel]

sounds fishy! maybe its the soon to be ex husband?? ex boyfriend? ex girlfriend? hum.. hahhahhaa! and of course if it is no one she's knows and is a idiot who stole her credit card, may he/she receive flowers when they are in jail!

[jcioccke]

Have to agree with you. You would have to have some personal "interest "in someone to do that. Well I think at least, but you never know anymore.

[Fëanor]

Meh. Bank of America will void the fraudulent charges and she won't be out a penny. She actually got some free flowers. The real victims here are the stores/etc. that are going to see the charges reversed.

[JasperST]

^^^^ Yep, they add three to four percent to every charge for a reason, we all pay for it when we use credit cards. I'd like to imprint Louisville Slugger on his forehead to return the favor.

[pujolsfan146]

The idiot who sent the flowers most likely thinks he or she is funny however I suspect when this is played out the thief will come to realize that sending the flowers was a really bad idea.

[JQC]

^^^^ Yep, they add three to four percent to every charge for a reason, we all pay for it when we use credit cards.

How does that play anywhere into the financial loss in cases of fraudulent use? The 3-4% that banks collect (some of which goes to Visa/MC/AmEx, etc.) is a convenience charge the retailers are willing to eat in lieu of requiring cash.

Agreed that the sellers are the ones who get screwed... but I don't see how the card surcharge factors in the math.

[Chomp]

^^^^ Yep, they add three to four percent to every charge for a reason, we all pay for it when we use credit cards. I'd like to imprint Louisville Slugger on his forehead to return the favor.

Retailers pay that 3-4%, not the consumer.

[JasperST]

How does that play anywhere into the financial loss in cases of fraudulent use? The 3-4% that banks collect (some of which goes to Visa/MC/AmEx, etc.) is a convenience charge the retailers are willing to eat in lieu of requiring cash.

Agreed that the sellers are the ones who get screwed... but I don't see how the card surcharge factors in the math.

Retailers pay that 3-4%, not the consumer.

If it's costing the retailer money, it's costing you money.

[crass cop]

^^true...had a gun dealer charge me the "charge" once when I bought a SIG on a CC....ouch!
told me the CC company charges him so he charges me...I use cash now

[JasperST]

^^true...had a gun dealer charge me the "charge" once when I bought a SIG on a CC....ouch!
told me the CC company charges him so he charges me...I use cash now

If it was a Visa or Mastercard he would be in deep sh*t if they found out. Part of your agreement as a merchant is that you cannot charge more for using the card, in order to encourage its' use. Violating the agreement puts you on a permanent ban and you will have to try again under someone else's name.

[JQC]

It's a little bit different in those situations, and there are only a few specific ways retailers can pass interchange fees on.

The card companies state in their merchant agreements that merchants in the US/Canada may not pass on interchange fees to customers. There are only a couple of ways that are sometimes used to get around that. One example is if the merchant is a service provider, such as a company that collects your property taxes for the state. Similar exemptions apply if the charge is for express handling or commissions. The other way is if the retailer states a cash discount. Usually those happen at smaller mom/pop places - or thin-line businesses like smaller gas stations. Larger businesses tend to eat the cost from their profit margins in the hopes that the convenience of paying on credit attracts more customers.

Do a search on Visa's website for, "convenience fee" or, "interchange fee" and you'll see what I mean. The actual pricing structure is quite complex and can vary a lot for the type of business, type of card, method of transaction, etc..

In cases like this, the fee comes straight from the merchants profit margin. The immediate cost to the consumer is the same, which means if I pay zero, I lose zero. Since the issuing bank pays nothing, the bank loses nothing and Visa/MC gets/loses nothing. The merchant gets screwed with the loss of overhead and profit - some of which they were willing to give to Visa/MC.

You're correct that if it costs the retailer money, it eventually comes back to cost the consumer money, but the key point is that the cost to the consumer is the same even if you've never owned a credit card. So your earlier remark that banks apply interchange fees as a way to offset fraudulent use (or as you said, "they add three to four percent... for a reason") isn't accurate. They add that the 3-4% simply because they have a business model that allows them to. It goes into sustaining the network, and their pockets.

[Chomp]

If it's costing the retailer money, it's costing you money.

True, but that affects all customers, cash or not.

^^true...had a gun dealer charge me the "charge" once when I bought a SIG on a CC....ouch!
told me the CC company charges him so he charges me...I use cash now

Yeah some stores do that.. which violates their TOS with the CC company and can get their contract revoked, if you report 'em.

[JasperST]

In cases like this, the fee comes straight from the merchants profit margin. The immediate cost to the consumer is the same, which means if I pay zero, I lose zero. Since the issuing bank pays nothing, the bank loses nothing and Visa/MC gets/loses nothing. The merchant gets screwed with the loss of overhead and profit - some of which they were willing to give to Visa/MC.

They do what I did, they raise their prices across the board. That way there is no discrimination. If someone pays in cash or check that's a plus.

You're correct that if it costs the retailer money, it eventually comes back to cost the consumer money, but the key point is that the cost to the consumer is the same even if you've never owned a credit card. So your earlier remark that banks apply interchange fees as a way to offset fraudulent use (or as you said, "they add three to four percent... for a reason") isn't accurate. They add that the 3-4% simply because they have a business model that allows them to. It goes into sustaining the network, and their pockets.

All of the markup covers all costs, including fraud and theft. It's all part of the overhead.

True, but that affects all customers, cash or not.

Yeah some stores do that.. which violates their TOS with the CC company and can get their contract revoked, if you report 'em.

My gun store had cash discounts but I believe what he did was to make it a private sale instead of going through the shop. Then he wanted cash on the barrelhead.