Hacker News Reader

Comment by raron | Hacker News Reader

> A payment should be a bank transfer. Anything more complicated is just something that is to be exploited by middle-men.

I disagree with that. Payments (especially online and contactless ones) should have some form of buyer protection, chargeback and a way to handle fraudulent transaction, lost / stolen cards, etc.

View on HN

> buyer protection, chargeback and a way to handle fraudulent transaction

There is; it's called a bank.

Which has zero incentive to side with the other party. You pay by bank transfer, once the money is on the merchant's account, why would their bank ever agree to a refund in case of dispute? Now it's between you and the merchant, good luck with filing police reports and court claims especially abroad.

In Switzerland there are a lot of cases where the bank will actually refund you if it was a fraudulent payment.

Hu, no?

The most common scams nowadays involve social engineering to make people log into their online banking and transfer money, specifically because there's no way to revert transactions. The victims are typically 100% liable as they accept and authorize these.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtbihSwrKhk

https://www.srf.ch/sendungen/kassensturz-espresso/kassenstur...

Fair enough, you're right.

Maybe that's changes by country, but here bank transfers are basically final and can not be cancelled or recalled. Why would a bank cover your losses from their profits?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com