Online merchants still rely on manual fraud checks

[mandy]

Payer authentication schemes such as Verified by Visa and MasterCard SecureCode are the anti-fraud tools most likely to be adopted by online retailers in the UK this year, but 19% of orders still undergo manual checks.

Collectively known as 3-D Secure, the systems also transfer fraud liability from the internet retailer to the card issuer. Around 29% of merchants expect to introduce them during 2006; another 25% were already using them in 2005.

Most merchants are layering their security – using an average of four anti-fraud measures. Others include Address Verification Service and Card Verification Number (a three-digit code on the back of each card).

By far the most popular type of manual check is telephone or email contact with the customer, followed by communication with the customer's bank, checking order histories and negative lists, and consulting third parties – all of which were roughly on a par...

full article: http://www.out-law.com/page-6574

[bargainbloodhound]

Others include Address Verification Service and Card Verification Number (a three-digit code on the back of each card).

yes to both

telephone or email contact with the customer: sometimes
communication with the customer's bank: never
checking order histories and negative lists: sometimes

Intentionally leaving high risk countries off our shipping tables so the customer can't checkout on our web site: yes
Discouraging purchases from a few other high risk countries by only offering global express shipping to those countries: yes

[xppman]

The online retail community needs to
continue working to beat fraudsters,
but while we should be promoting prudence we shouldn’t be
scaring the consumer away from buying online.

This was what my whole take was on the PP BPP SPP programs
when ebay shoved them down out throats and placed all those "Protection"
logos all over the titles in the main search.


ebay was essentially scaring the consumers away from buying
on ebay by introducing these  "programs" to begin with IMO.

I bet it made many think:
"What do I need that for?
Is really that unsafe here on ebay to buy
that I need some protection program?"
Never mind I'll go elsewhere to buy.


While we all know from a sellers point of view
that ebay's intentions were purely motivated for the
aggregation of new users to increase ebays revenues.

I think they failed to see the undertones and "risky fraud type perception"
message they were placing in the minds of consumers.

Notice how rapidly sell through for many went DOWN
shortly after these PP programs were introduced on ebay?

Notice that just within the last couple of months they finally
REMOVED the little PP Shield and have watered down the whole
protection schemes even further?

Notice how to be part of the NEW Express you must switch your
PP preferences to NOT block unconfirmed address?

Notice how ebays staff is trying to tell us it is "not an issue"
with most sellers anyhow to ship to an unconfirmed addresses?

Me thinks someone at ebay knows they screwed up.
Me thinks someone at ebay knows the true numbers are down.
Me thinks someone at ebay is NOT being truthful about "sell through" rate.
Me thinks someone at ebay made the "Fee Hikes" last year to compensate for those
down numbers, low sell through and losses in FVF's.

Me also thinks that Medved was "paid off' to inflated numbers
after so many were pointing out the decline in numbers for several months
right after the PP SPP BPP programs and logos were introduced.

What do you think?