advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Is It Time To Stop Mailing Fully Activated Gift Cards?

June 3rd, 2010

The nature of the service provides a legitimate reason for all four pieces of information. The name and E-mail address is needed to send the message; the snailmail address could appear to be used to trace the errant gift card, if it doesn’t arrive on time; and the phone number could simply be a way to contact the recipient to confirm receipt.

In addition, the name could be positioned as the only way to make sure that only the intended recipient uses the card. The fact that stores today do not check identities need not come up. But it’s also true that changing that policy might not be such a horrible idea, given how popular gift cards are with cyberthieves.

It’s still their favorite laundry technique when dealing with a stolen credit or debit card. Thieves steal the debit/credit card from victims and then rush to the nearest store to purchase as many gift cards as possible, as long as it’s below the limit set by the store to check identification. Those gift cards can be used long after the stolen cards are deactivated, typically to buy goods that are then sold on eBay or on street corners.

But with a recipient’s name, E-mail and snailmail addresses and phone number—along with the gift card number—the chain now has the long-desired full gift card transparency.

Such a service would require a few changes, such as having only bogus cards on display. The real gift cards would be stored under the counter at POS stations, and each card would need to have some sort of a fold over where the password for that card would be typed.

Once paid for, the cashier would give the gift card to the consumer, tear off the password and hand it to the consumer separately, suggesting that they put it in a pocket away from the gift card. Alternatively, the POS could be modified to allow the consumer to type in his/her own preferred PIN for the card.

The store could even offer to mail the card as part of its service. If that option is offered, then the password would be included in the E-mail sent before the card is received.

In the mobile world, gift cards raise yet more issues, especially in terms of security, as Target and Starbucks discovered last month.

One card payments firm, Dimpledough, is pushing a gift card delivery system, but only for cards that are ordered online.

Dimpledough CEO Shawn Barrieau said one retailer—identified only as having more than $15 billion in annual sales—has bought its virtual gift card service and plans to roll it out next year. Initially it will be a free service, but the retailer may move to a 50-cent-to-75-cent charge later.

Barrieau said he saw many attractions to offering this service for the physical cards, but said there were legal issues—changing from state to state—that might complicate the ROI. Unclaimed property rules, for example, might make some chains prefer ignorance to transparency. “For liability reasons, some retailers just won’t want to know” who the recipients are, he said.


advertisement

2 Comments | Read Is It Time To Stop Mailing Fully Activated Gift Cards?

  1. Steve Sommers Says:

    When we initially developed our gift card application, we included a feature to place funds on a card but keep the card deactivated with the reason code “ID check required.” This ID check would only apply to the first time the gift card is used. While we thought it was a nice feature, a vast majority of the merchants using our application bypass the feature or worse, complain that they have to turn off the feature (it’s on by default). What we have found is that merchants are hesitant to do anything that may slow down the check-out lines. Having a clerk verify the ID of a customer the first time a gift card is used can slow down the lines so this feature is a very hard sale to the merchant.

    A second issue is various state laws. Many states inadvertently give advantages to the merchant to keep the gift cards anonymous. Things like monthly fees, expiring funds and unused funds are handled differently for cards with names attached vs. anonymous. I’m not certain, but I believe that in California and Texas, if a name has been attached to a card and the cards has not been used for some period (2 or 4 years I think), the funds get turned over to the state so they can try to return the funds to the rightful owner (yeah, right!). So for merchants in these states, sticking the “$20 I Owe Anyone” in the mail is less of a liability than the inactive gift card attached to a person.

  2. Lee Says:

    I certainly wouldn’t want to provide my recipient’s info to get a gift card. If, however, I could get the email, and forward on, that would be useful for the times the card is mailed, vs given in person.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.