Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Please note this is NOT a joke


This information is worth reading and extremely serious, By understanding how the VISA &

MasterCard Telephone Credit Card Scam works, you'll be better prepared to

protect yourself. Note, the callers do not ask for your card number; they already have it.


One of my colleagues was called on Wednesday from 'VISA', and I was called

on Thursday from 'Master Card'. The scam works like this: Caller:

'This is (name), and I'm calling from the Security and Fraud Department at

VISA. My Badge number is 12460. Your card has been flagged for an unusual

purchase pattern, and I'm calling to verify. This would be on your VISA card

which was issued by (name of bank). Did you purchase an Anti- Telemarketing

Device for ?497.99 from a Marketing company based in Arizona?'


When you say 'No', the caller continues with, 'Then we will be issuing a

credit to your account. This is a company we have been watching and the

charges range from ?297 to ?497, just under the ?500 purchase pattern that

flags most cards. Before your next statement, the credit will be sent to

(gives you your address), is that correct?'


You say 'yes'. The caller continues - 'I will be starting a Fraud

investigation. If you have any questions, you should call the 1- 800 number

listed on the back of your card (1-

800-VISA) and ask for Security.'


You will need to refer to this Control Number. The caller then gives you a 6

digit number. 'Do you need me to read it again?'


Here's the IMPORTANT part on how the scam works. The caller then says, 'I

need to verify you are in possession of your card'. He'll ask you to 'turn

your card over and look for some numbers'. There are 7 numbers; the first 4

are part of your card number, the next 3 are the security Numbers that

verify you are the possessor of the card. These are the numbers you

sometimes use to make Internet purchases to prove you have the card. The

caller will ask you to read the 3 numbers to him. After you tell the caller

the 3 numbers, he'll say, 'That is correct, I just needed to verify that the

card has not been lost or stolen, and that you still have your card. Do you

have any other questions?' After you say No, the caller then thanks you and

states, 'Don't hesitate to call back if you do, and hangs up.


You actually say very little, and they never ask for or tell you the Card

number. But someone in our office decided to call back when they received

a call on Wednesday, they called back within 20

minutes to ask a question. Is he glad he did! The REAL VISA Security

Department told us it was a scam and in the last 15 minutes a new purchase

of ?497.99 was charged to the card.



Long story - short - he made a real fraud report and closed the VISA

account. What the scammers want is the

3-digit PIN number on the back of the card. Don't give it to them. Instead,

tell them you'll call VISA or Master card directly for verification of their

conversation. The real VISA told him that they will never ask for anything on

the card as they already know the information since they issued the card! If

you give the scammers your 3 Digit PIN Number, you think you're receiving a

credit. However, by the time you get your statement you'll see charges for

purchases you didn't make, and by then it's almost too late and/or more

difficult to actually file a fraud report.


What makes this more remarkable is that on Thursday, he got a call from a

'Jason Richardson of Master Card' with a word-for-word repeat of the VISA

scam. This time he didn't let him finish. he hung up! He filed a police

report, as instructed by VISA. The police said they are taking several of

these reports daily! They also urged him to tell everybody he knows that this

scam is happening.


Please pass this on to all your family and friends. By informing each other,

we can protect each other

I've been called a few times by my bank (First Direct) to check on VISA purchases I've made. They're pretty on the ball and they even caught one card scam in the act, which was impressive.

But it pisses me off that - when they call you - they just start by asking for your passwords to confirm who you are, before you've even confirmed who they are.

If you say you're not happy to speak to them about anything unless you've called them back on their main telephone banking number, they spring into action and give you a decent security procedure - but you have to ask for it - which is stupid as it wouldn't occur to everyone.


This scam is only doing what the banks do themselves - no wonder it's getting results.

No I cut and pasted it from an e-mail sent to us by our Senior Partner, so doubt it is a hoax, I assumed it happened to her though sounded very personal, and I had to take some things like proper identities out to protect people before I posted it on the forum, will ask if it actually happened to her, the likelihood of getting a copy of the same thing isn't rare though as we do have over 500 people working here and were all asked to forward it on to friends and colleagues, but just to put my curiosity at rest will ask anyways.

"cut and pasted it from an e-mail sent to us by our Senior Partner"... Sorry, but that just makes it sound even more like a hoax, to me. It's the most senior members of staff in my place who fall for this sort of thing every time.


Agree with the poster who gets annoyed with banks ringing us and asking us to prove who we are. You rang me, FFS!

It's not a hoax, it's a scam that did the rounds a few years ago and this coming around againd is just making people aware that you should be cautious when giving out your personal and card details over the phone. http://www.snopes.com/crime/warnings/creditcard.asp

If you forward this thread to at least ten people...God will love you! Now, that is stupid.


Joking apart, I for one would like to thank LizzyGotDizzy for flagging this up, even if it is a hoax. I mean let's face it, the reason the three digit security number was placed on the back was so that one side only copies of the card couldn't be used fraudulently. Therefore, even if it is a hoax it seems to be one that could perhaps COULD ACTUALLY HAPPEN!


Good point as well about banks calling you up and asking you to confirm your details without you having any idea who they are! This is so ridiculous. I have terminated several calls from people who claimed to be calling from my bank as I couldn't know for sure.


It's a good one to use with debt collectors as well >:D<

LizzygotDizzy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No I cut and pasted it from an e-mail sent to us

> by our Senior Partner, so doubt it is a hoax, I

> assumed it happened to her though sounded very

> personal, and I had to take some things like

> proper identities out to protect people before I

> posted it on the forum, will ask if it actually

> happened to her, the likelihood of getting a copy

> of the same thing isn't rare though as we do have

> over 500 people working here and were all asked to

> forward it on to friends and colleagues, but just

> to put my curiosity at rest will ask anyways.


Look at the link I posted, this has been doing the rounds for a long time, identical story (though in $$ not ??)


http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/hoaxes/hoaxDetails.asp?HName=Visa+%26+MasterCard+Fraud+Hoax&Page=4


"Type: Urban Legend


Description:



An email message warning of a modus operandi used by malicious individuals to acquire Visa and MasterCard numbers is spreading in the Internet.


It tells of how a swindler identifying himself as a credit card security officer phones target persons notifying them that their cards have been flagged due to unusual purchase patterns. The caller then elaborates on the situation and requests to get the three-digit PIN number of the card.


The message ends with a cautionary note informing recipients of this email chain letter how credit cards of owners who fell for this fraud were used for purchase by the phone caller. However, Visa and MasterCard have not verified these claims as true. Though there is a small likelihood that the event it discussed may happen for real, the very fact that it takes more than the last 3-digit PIN to decode a user's account disounts it as a hoax.


Trend Micro advises its customers to disregard, delete, and not pass this email message anymore because it is a hoax.


Original Message:



Subject: New Fraud technique


This was just sent from M. Pearson who got it from a lady she works out with. So, beware-- Subject: VISA & MASTER CARD FRAUD We all receive emails all the time regarding one scam or another; but last week I REALLY DID get scammed! Both VISA and MasterCard told me that this scam is currently being worked throughout the Midwest, with some variance as to the product or amount, and if you are called, just hang up.


My husband was called on Wednesday from "VISA" and I was called in Thursday from "MasterCard". It worked like this: Person calling says, "This is Carl Patterson and I'm calling from the Security and Fraud department at VISA. My Badge number is 12460. Your card has been flagged for an unusual purchase pattern, and I'm calling to verify. This would be on your VISA card issued by 5/3 bank. Did you purchase an Anti-Telemarketing Device for $497.99 from a marketing company based in Arizona?"


(Blah blah)


"


Sorry!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...