OJ, Canada might be different than Minnesota but here, the store does not get charged for a fraudulent purchase and I'm guessing that would be nationwide. Once the store gets an approval code for the card purchase (and the sale isn't normally complete until the approval these days) the purchase then goes through and the card company is now liable, not the retailer (except of course for the card fee). That's why I often took a card over a check. Challenging a charge these days is more difficult. Used to be people would get buyer's remorse on a custom purchase and try to challenge a charge. Doesn't work like that anymore which is good. Those charges go against the profits, much of which is the 20% or more interest that some fools pay. There was also a check approving company who would give a code and if the check bounced, they paid for it. That was rather expensive though so it's not real popular. And checks aren't real popular around here anymore anyway. I had my card stopped while I was out of town because of suspicious activity and got a call from them once asking if I had bought a computer from a large discount retailer who shall remain nameless (so some grouch won't go nutzo!) They replaced the card the first time. I wonder how much of the scam is coming from inside the card companies themselves. I can't believe that they do intense background checks on their phone support folks. Most of the time and in both of my cases there was no loss to anyone but me (for my inconvenience - fortunately I had cash to cover the hotel) since card purchases need to be approved up front now. In the old days of carbon impressions and sending them in to be processed there was quite a delay and more trouble for everyone involved.

Thank you all for your replies. You have taught me a lot of things which I have not thought about before. I thought originally that paying by credit card or cash advance was just as easy as shopping at grocery store, and I did not have to deal with loan paper work, its going back forth process, or long wait. I really appreciate all your views and explanations. You guys are wonderful. P.S. Except sometimes I found that there has always been someone who does not comment on the original post itself, but something totally un-related. Even if I were a drug dealer or a criminal, shouldn't I have a right to post a question. I have come to the garden forum and home forum quite often to seek helps and learn a lot of things. I really enjoy making friends and knowing a lot of kind people here. People here have always been so helpful, kind, and open-hearted. I have been quite touched that people care about one another, when I come to the sites. I don't think anyone who is a drug dealer would spend his/her time on this kind of helping-each-other forum. My husband and I are just helping my mother-in-law with her own personal business. Anyway, I am ignoring the harsh comment on something I have never done. After all, it's not useful to me, so I don't need to pay much attention to it. I value the rest of comments a great deal. Thank you.

Cynic >This one has me confused though: "...my cell phone provider gouged me for 4 consecutive months of payments even though I was paying cash at their store." If you have auto-pay, why are you paying cash at the store? Something's missing or I'm not following something. I was paying my bill in cash at their store. I had already called the (cell phone provider) ahead of time and told them I would be doing this. Each month my bill would arrive, each month it kept reflecting an overpayment. I would call them and they said it would be corrected. This happened FOUR months in a row. I contacted the credit card company and told them to cancel the card. Same thing happened with them. They would say it would be canceled. The following month I would get a bill for the same incorrect amount. I finally spoke to someone at the CC co. who said until the cell phone provider notified them, I would continue to be responsible for the charges whether they were right or wrong. They never said ANYTHING about having to have a cancellation number. BOTH the cell phone provider and CC company neglected to inform me of this necessary requirement. I wonder why? Well the reason why, is because THEY were MAKING MONEY and didn't want it to stop. These companies do not make it easy. They don't fully inform you when you sign up, and they don't tell you what you really need to do in order to cancel this type of payment. I finally contacted a consumer newspaper reporter. She said she doesn't care for automatic payments for the same reason and gets many calls regarding this. She contacted the cell phone provider's publicity relations department. That worked. They must have called my CC company because everything was taken care of within the month and I didn't receive any more credit card bills. My cell phone bills are what they are supposed to be. I still pay in cash. I no longer have the credit card. They send me solicitations all the time. Thanks, but no thanks. Contacting the AG's office is a good idea. dadoes >dreamgarden probably thought if he/she paid cash, the autopay wouldn't trigger. That's not necessarily the case. I wonder what IS the case? Who at EITHER company, was supposed to tell me I needed a cancellation number in order to stop the autopay? Out of a total of seven calls, 4 to the cell phone provider and 3 to the CC company, not ONE person mentioned this. Don't they teach customer service reps this information? I no longer wanted auto-pay and told them this. I said I would be paying in cash from now on and to cancel auto-pay. I don't understand how I could have been any clearer. >I recall a couple cases where I work of customers having autopay set up through CheckFree. One fellow died, his wife had NO CLUE about any of their finances and the auto-pay kept coming, for MONTHS. She no longer wanted the service, but she didn't contact us or was even aware the service existed, so how are we to know that? "How are we to know that?". How did you find out that her husband died? How do you know the wife no longer wanted the service if she was never contacted? Was she on the account too? Doesn't your company have some policy regarding taking money from a deceased person's account? > The other case, the fellow changed his account services, but didn't change the monthly autopay amount. We contacted him, he still didn't change the amount. Built up a large credit that had to be refunded when he eventually closed the service. When the fellow called to change his account services, was he asked if the present autopay amount was ok? If he was changing his account services, this would seem to be a logical question to ask a customer. Was he notified by telephone or in writing? This is why I like to receive paper billing. Sometimes when a credit card company calls (and leaves a message), they don't always state the nature of their business. When I have called back, they try to sell me some service or item I'm not interested in. Now I don't return calls unless they leave a message telling me something is wrong, or needs to be corrected. I had them put this in my file. I don't want to be bothered with solicitations or irrelevant matters that aren't directly related to some kind of problem with my account. In my opinion the above examples are just more reason to pay as you go and not allow company's to have recurring access to your bank account.

I work in the credit card industry and I have never heard of such a regulation on any of the networks I do business with. If someone did steal your credit card and do some online ordering, there are a few key points to protect both you and the merchant: 1) by steal card, I'm assuming steal your number, but not the actual card, since if someone stole your card, you'd have had it turned off. 2) if someone stole your number and used it, you can do a chargeback for any fraudulent charges. so you have no risk, as long as you check your statements each month. 3) the merchants are now required to ask for a card id code, which is embossed on the back of your credit card. If they had only stolen your account number, they would not be in possession of your card id code. The merchant can certainly waive doing this, but if they do, they lose protection against chargebacks. 4) another chargeback level of protection is bill-to address verification. Again, the theory of the credit card networks is that if someone stole your number, they would most likely not know your address. Again, if the address and zip don't match, when the merchant authorizes, it is up to them to accept the order. If they accept a mismatched order, and a chargeback comes back on them, there is no protection for the merchant. So based on (4), many merchants will decline your card, if address verify doesn't match. But again, this is strictly bill-to, per credit card network regulations. I did a google, and I do see that one bank (who oddly enough, gives me a lot of trouble at work), Wells Fargo, has an odd rule that your credit card must be configured with the bill-to address, and a set of possible ship-to addresses. If you enter a ship-to that is not on the list, they will decline the order. This is apparently something unique to them and maybe a few other banks, but the credit-card networks behind the scenes do not require this. In fact, one odd thing I see on a site is this comment: "We hear time and again that "other companies didn't require this" but those other companies are not following security regulations that are required by all credit card issuers." But that is just not true. I work with the issuers, and the most critical requirement to them is the card id code, closely followed by address verification of bill-to. Visa is probably the strictest, and they have issued '12 commandments' of best practices in credit card processing. And this bill-to ship-to nonsense isn't there. Beyond your control? I just would not shop with that online merchant again. (by the way, during the order entry process, were you asked for your card id code?)