Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 7,829
Registered: ‎03-18-2010

Re: Using Credit Cards Encourages Extra Spending 💳

It absolutely is true @itiswhatitis that debit cards do not have the same protections as CC. With CC's you don't have to worry that if you don't realize someone stole it and you didn't report it for such and such time that you would be responsible for a certain amount. The fact that it CAN happen with a debit and it CANNOT with a CC is a fact.


  • Up to $500 if you notify the bank with 48 hours and 60 days of your lost or stolen card, and
  • All of the fraudulent charges if you don't notify the bank until after 60 days.

That does NOT happen with a CC. While banks can say, well we are going to go ahead and recredit their acct even though they didn't report it within the time frame is great but by LAW they do not have to. If they decided not to, there is nothing you could do. This is what this bill (that stalled) would have changed. It would have put the customers responsibility at $50, period. 


S.2200 — 113th Congress (2013-2014) Introduced into Senate on 4/2014 


By Senator Mark Warner, Virginia


Consumer Debit Card Protection Act of 2014 - Amends the Electronic Fund Transfer Act to require a financial institution to recredit a consumer's account within 7 days (currently, 10 days) after receiving notice of an error in the manner of an electronic debit transaction.

Limits consumer liability for unauthorized use of a debit card to the following circumstances:

  • the debit card is an accepted debit card;
  • the liability does not exceed $50;
  • the issuer has given the consumer a description of a means by which the issuer may be notified of loss or theft of the card;
  • the unauthorized use occurs before the issuer has been notified of that fact or that an unauthorized use may occur as the result of loss, theft, or otherwise; and
  • the issuer has provided a method whereby the card user can be identified as the person authorized to use the card.

States that an issuer has been notified when reasonable steps have been taken to give the issuer the pertinent information, whether or not any particular officer, employee, or agent of the issuer does in fact receive that information.

Places the the burden of proof upon the issuer to show that: (1) the use was authorized, or (2) the conditions of liability for the unauthorized use of a debit card have been met.


This bill would have given debit cards the same protection as credit cards because this didn't pass and stalled, you, I and anyone else do NOT have the same protection! It doesn't matter that your bank decided to reimburse you and your nephew. If the next time you report this late (48 hrs- 60days) you could possibly be on the hook for $500 of it. The bank by law does NOT have to reimburse you. If they do, that is great but they do not HAVE to and the fact that this bill was written is proof that enough people have lost out on money when there would have been no possibility of that happening if they had used a credit card. 


The fact that the bank has 10 days to reimburse your acct (which they tried to move to 7 days) means the customer is out of that money, possibly the only money they have access to which would not happen with a credit card. 


This bill would have limited customers responsibility to $50 and no more than that and puts the burden of proof onto the bank, not the customer which it now is. 


ALL banks could decide to make you responsible for $500 if you report fraudulent activity between 48hrs to 60 days. This bill would have stopped this. ALL banks could make you responsible for the entire amount if reported after 60 days. This bill would have stopped this. 


Even if you haven't had this happen to you and have been reimbursed (and I am thankful for that) the above is possible and legal right now for the banks to do should they decide to do that. This bill would have prevented that. 

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.