Where to report compromised Credit Cards / Debit Cards wire fraud by (suspected) cabin steward

[Mary229]

25 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

Reading the original post the OP said after making a report the Chief Security Officer told them that only plumber and cabin steward entered their room and that he would investigate but expected them to deny. It seems to me the Chief Security Officer is making the insinuation that plumber or cabin steward committed the fraud and the OP was just going along with what they were being told. 

If they had actually called the bank and gotten more details they could have made a better decision.  If it was a wire transfer the bank could have told them where the money was headed.  That may have immediately excluded anyone on the ship.  Why is everyone so bent on believing that this actually happened on the ship?  It likely originated elsewhere.  
 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, Mary229 said:

If they had actually called the bank and gotten more details they could have made a better decision.  If it was a wire transfer the bank could have told them where the money was headed.  That may have immediately excluded anyone on the ship.  Why is everyone so bent on believing that this actually happened on the ship?  It likely originated elsewhere.  
 

I think it was the OP who insinuated at happened on the ship, not those of us who have responded to this thread.

[Mary229]

8 hours ago, ontheweb said:

I think it was the OP who insinuated at happened on the ship, not those of us who have responded to this thread.

A little of both.  I have trouble with the defense of their hasty actions.  I understand they don’t understand that a misplaced accusation can have someone fired but I think that needs to be considered.  The OP had choices

[sparks1093]

On 12/2/2022 at 6:03 AM, Mary229 said:

Call your bank and don’t play Sherlock Holmes.  

 

10 hours ago, Mary229 said:

If they had actually called the bank and gotten more details they could have made a better decision.  If it was a wire transfer the bank could have told them where the money was headed.  That may have immediately excluded anyone on the ship.  Why is everyone so bent on believing that this actually happened on the ship?  It likely originated elsewhere.  
 

Sounds like you want them to be Sherlock Holmes 😉. The bank doesn't require card holders to do that and I know that I wouldn't. I would leave it to the investigative agency if they chose to investigate, which they very likely wouldn't. The OP (and any other card user) isn't required to identify who they suspect committed the fraud when they call the bank and we don't even know if they did. From what the OP provided it is reasonable to conclude that the fraud occurred on the ship and that it might have been the steward or the plumber. That doesn't mean that someone else couldn't have done it, but that is where any investigation would start until they were excluded.

 

I personally don't care where it happened, other than possibly that having an impact on where a police report gets filed. 

[Mary229]

4 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

 

Sounds like you want them to be Sherlock Holmes 😉. The bank doesn't require card holders to do that and I know that I wouldn't. I would leave it to the investigative agency if they chose to investigate, which they very likely wouldn't. The OP (and any other card user) isn't required to identify who they suspect committed the fraud when they call the bank and we don't even know if they did. From what the OP provided it is reasonable to conclude that the fraud occurred on the ship and that it might have been the steward or the plumber. That doesn't mean that someone else couldn't have done it, but that is where any investigation would start until they were excluded.

 

I personally don't care where it happened, other than possibly that having an impact on where a police report gets filed. 

Filing a police report on the ship is not going to do it.  They are a private security firm not the police and have not jurisdiction except on the ship and cannot get the information needed to launch an investigation.  All they can do is ask the crew then likely fire them.  If you can live with making accusations that get some one fired so be it

[sparks1093]

1 minute ago, Mary229 said:

Filing a police report on the ship is not going to do it.  They are a private security firm not the police and have not jurisdiction except on the ship and cannot get the information needed to launch an investigation.  All they can do is ask the crew then likely fire them.  If you can live with making accusations that get some one fired so be it

Sounded to me like the Chief Security officer was the one that accused by pointing out only employees had been in the cabin. 

[Mary229]

18 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

Sounded to me like the Chief Security officer was the one that accused by pointing out only employees had been in the cabin. 

I didn’t come to the same conclusion.  

[sparks1093]

12 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I didn’t come to the same conclusion.  

I can tell.🙂 Since neither of us is involved it doesn't matter, we're just passing the time of day and hopefully other people reading the thread can learn something from it (even if it's only lock your valuables in the safe).

[Mary229]

14 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

I can tell.🙂 Since neither of us is involved it doesn't matter, we're just passing the time of day and hopefully other people reading the thread can learn something from it (even if it's only lock your valuables in the safe).

And don’t use debit cards and stop, consider your actions, take the correct course.  I have way too much experience with people using cards then doing stupid things .  The stories I could tell from my experiences as a merchant 

Edited December 5, 2022 by Mary229

[GeezerCouple]

3 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

Sounded to me like the Chief Security officer was the one that accused by pointing out only employees had been in the cabin. 

 

That's exactly what I thought, from the way OP worded the first post.

This was included:

 

"...

Reported this incident to the Chief Security Officer with written statement. He confirmed only cabin steward and a plumber were in our cabin. He would question them but he thought they would of course deny.

..."

 

Upon first reading that, I was surprised that any Security Officer would make any comment at all like that about who was or was not in the cabin.  Full Stop.

I would have expected all of that to remain subject to internal investigation, the kind of information many of us would like to have in such circumstances, but it's not revealed unless there is some legal investigation and it's required.

 

I am NOT suggesting the following actually occurred, but I'm thinking of the point of view and responsibility of ship Security.  For all the Chief Security Officer knew, that credit card wasn't actually left out at all, but was retrieved and left out after they returned, but before Security arrived.

How could Security even know for sure where the card or wallet was before seeing where it was at the moment they arrived?

Isn't that what an investigation is to determine?

I mean, for all Security knew, the OP had taken that wallet - and the card - with them on the excursion, and perhaps even used it... and that would eventually clear anyone who "was in the cabin", etc.

Again, I'm not trying to claim that happened.  I *am* trying to point out that there are reasons for "investigations", and also why it is surprising to hear that a Chief Security Officer would say something like that prior to a proper investigation.  (And from what I've heard about other on-ship investigations, they aren't all that forthcoming later, either, absent legal requirements...)

 

And since when does any "security official" decline to question someone because "they would of course deny."   That would pretty much stop most investigations before they ever start.

 

GC

Edited December 5, 2022 by GeezerCouple
Typo

[Mary229]

29 minutes ago, GeezerCouple said:

 

That's exactly what I thought, from the way OP worded the first post.

This was included:

 

"...

Reported this incident to the Chief Security Officer with written statement. He confirmed only cabin steward and a plumber were in our cabin. He would question them but he thought they would of course deny.

..."

 

Upon first reading that, I was surprised that any Security Officer would make any comment at all like that about who was or was not in the cabin.  Full Stop.

I would have expected all of that to remain subject to internal investigation, the kind of information many of us would like to have in such circumstances, but it's not revealed unless there is some legal investigation and it's required.

 

I am NOT suggesting the following actually occurred, but I'm thinking of the point of view and responsibility of ship Security.  For all the Chief Security Officer knew, that credit card wasn't actually left out at all, but was retrieved and left out after they returned, but before Security arrived.

How could Security even know for sure where the card or wallet was before seeing where it was at the moment they arrived?

Isn't that what an investigation is to determine?

I mean, for all Security knew, the OP had taken that wallet - and the card - with them on the excursion, and perhaps even used it... and that would eventually clear anyone who "was in the cabin", etc.

Again, I'm not trying to claim that happened.  I *am* trying to point out that there are reasons for "investigations", and also why it is surprising to hear that a Chief Security Officer would say something like that prior to a proper investigation.  (And from what I've heard about other on-ship investigations, they aren't all that forthcoming later, either, absent legal requirements...)

 

And since when does any "security official" decline to question someone because "they would of course deny."   That would pretty much stop most investigations before they ever start.

 

GC

I agree with much of your statement but want to emphasize what was said or not said is being implied not quoted.   Regardless ship security do not have the correct authority to investigate credit card fraud 

[GeezerCouple]

9 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I agree with much of your statement but want to emphasize what was said or not said is being implied not quoted.   Regardless ship security do not have the correct authority to investigate credit card fraud 

 

I didn't take the statement by OP in the first post about what the Chief Security Officer said to be an exact direct quotation (it wasn't in quotation marks, for example), but it was posted as being what that officer said, not what the officer "implied" by some indirect wording (?) or other method.

And I'm not sure how the Chief Security Officer would have "implied" that only those two crew members were in the cabin without actually saying so.

 

OP can clarify if they so wish.  I'm obviously not able to state that what actually happened was or was not exactly what OP wrote.  Without other evidence, we here on CC (and most online forums) tend to accept a description as it was written.  An exception might be when someone writes what someone said, when I think we all understand that it might not be an exact verbatim quote*, but we usually assume that it accurately conveys the essence of what was said.

* There are times that someone writes something that does include the word "verbatim".  I've got some phrases from "memorable" comments I've heard that are indeed verbatim, but they aren't usually comments I share. 😉 

 

GC

[thinfool]

We have had compromised cards several times over the last few years.  The actual direction from the owner of the card (Visa, MC, Amex, etc) is to call the number they have for reporting loss, never have I been instructed to notify anyone else, tho this is certainly possible.  Only the person that answers the phone number that I have called can give me instructions on what to do next.  It is not my card, it belongs to the issuer.

Typically I just answer the questions and take the direction that the CC folks offer.

What I have learned over the many times I have had to deal with this...the CC companies do not care about the loss or who did it.  They take the information, close your account, send out new cards for you to use.  Then you get to take care of all of the autopays that you had linked to your now worthless card numbers.  A real pain.

Edited December 5, 2022 by thinfool

[Philob]

I don't think this is the Security Chief's first time around the block dealing with an alleged theft on board. Probably one of the first questions every pax would ask is "Who could've been in my cabin!?"  The Chief was probably already looking it up when he hears the word "steal", "theft".  And 99% of the time those crew members will deny because they didn't do it anyway.

 

OTH if the Chief is worth his pay and notices a pattern he may actually scroll up the hallway videos for a look see. Probably consult with the XO or Captain before doing anything like a crew cabin search.

 

The OP mentioned that Citibank recorded several attempts before a $1k transaction went through. I get a text & email alert from them whenever something over a $100 comes up that was not a physical transaction.

 

As I mentioned before and without additional info from them, their information may have been compromised before they even got on the ship.  

[ldubs]

6 hours ago, Mary229 said:

All they can do is ask the crew then likely fire them. 

 

You keep repeating this.   If this happened every time there was a complaint there wouldn't be any staff left.  😀

[ldubs]

29 minutes ago, Philob said:

 I get a text & email alert from them whenever something over a $100 comes up that was not a physical transaction.

 

 

I get a text and Mrs Ldubs gets an email for all charges regardless of size.  Most of the time I hear the text "ding" before I've had time to put my credit card away.  

[Essiesmom]

Since the wallet was only on plain view on day1, then only the person/people in the cabin that day would be suspect.  @Copper10-8 we need a security consult!

[cruisemom42]

11 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

I get a text and Mrs Ldubs gets an email for all charges regardless of size.  Most of the time I hear the text "ding" before I've had time to put my credit card away.  

 

Another good reason to have a smart phone when traveling.

[Mary229]

1 hour ago, ldubs said:

 

I get a text and Mrs Ldubs gets an email for all charges regardless of size.  Most of the time I hear the text "ding" before I've had time to put my credit card away.  

This was a wire transfer .  This is whole different situation.   

[Mary229]

1 hour ago, ldubs said:

 

You keep repeating this.   If this happened every time there was a complaint there wouldn't be any staff left.  😀

Do you really think that many people go around blaming crew for theft?  We must live in very different worlds 

[ldubs]

1 minute ago, Mary229 said:

This was a wire transfer .  This is whole different situation.   

 

All activity on my cc number is reported back to me.  I've never used the card for a wire xfer and don't understand why that would be excluded?  

[GeezerCouple]

8 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

This was a wire transfer .  This is whole different situation.   

 

I guess I've lost track of the initial problem.

 

I didn't realize a wire transfer by charge card was a thing.

Any wire transfer we've ever made was a bit of a pain, nothing at all as simple as presenting a card or giving someone a card number.

 

ETA:  I thought the title of "wire fraud" included things like charge fraud.

 

GC

Edited December 5, 2022 by GeezerCouple

[Mary229]

Just now, ldubs said:

 

All activity on my cc number is reported back to me.  I've never used the card for a wire xfer and don't understand why that would be excluded?  

With debit cards, which this was, what happens by internet, by card present or card not present are a tangled mess and without asking you would not know.  You would get a like alert in any of these cases.  The bank should immediately be able to tell you the destination of a wire transfer.  
 

Just so you know you can completely opt out of wire transfers and is a wise thing to do. I don’t use debit cards, wire transfer or any money forwarding services.  These have limitless liability and are not covered by the same strong consumer protections as a true credit card 

[ldubs]

1 minute ago, Mary229 said:

Do you really think that many people go around blaming crew for theft?  We must live in very different worlds 

 

No, I don't.  But I do think many people complain about all kinds of things.  And I think a complaint, even about theft, does not result in a knee-jerk termination.  I give the ship management more credit than that.    

 

 

[Mary229]

4 minutes ago, GeezerCouple said:

 

I guess I've lost track of the initial problem.

 

I didn't realize a wire transfer by charge card was a thing.

Any wire transfer we've ever made was a bit of a pain, nothing at all as simple as presenting a card or giving someone a card number.

 

ETA:  I thought the title of "wire fraud" included things like charge fraud.

 

GC

As I stated below this post it is a debit card.  A debit card, as you know, is one access point to a checking account.   Alerts for activity are generally muddled.  I have witnessed these confusions in my business dealings.  This is why I have questioned the origin of the fraud, not questioning the OP but that it began with a misplaced debit card.  They basically got a fraud alert about their bank account and concluded it was because they left the card out.   Someone hacking for debit cards could do the same thing online.  So if you shopped with that debit card and that merchant was hacked the fraudster could not instigate a money transfer from your bank account.  The OP may have never done anything errant.  
 

moral - never use a debit card.