On Sep 14, 2:38*pm, Roland Perry wrote:

On the other hand they have a C&P terminal which they say comes with a
5% surcharge, while recommending drives to claim the surcharge is 10%.
It gets worse and worse!

Actually I just looked at their site, and they do not appear to do
anything of the sort.

What they do is charge a surcharge of 5% themselves, which the taxi
driver does not see. There is then a fixed charge for hire of the C&P
machine payable by the taxi driver. Their suggestion to drivers is
that the driver charges a 10% surcharge for card payments, of which 5%
goes to them and 5% goes towards the fixed charge the driver pays to
them.

That might mean that they're not good value, but it isn't immoral.
The driver is just passing on the cost.

Neil

On Sep 14, 2:53 pm, wrote:

This is taxi drivers we're talking about. The customer is merely a temporary
inconvenience between them and their money.

There is that. I suspect the only way there'll be blanket card
acceptance by minicabs is if it becomes a condition of their licence.
And I bet that late at night the machine will often be "not working",
just as seems miraculously to happen to the meters (where fitted).

Of course, a further disadvantage to the merchant is that a log of
transactions could be useful to tax authorities...

Neil

In message
, at
05:50:46 on Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Neil Williams
remarked:
Strange how Taxipay say their service is "Free, easy to set up". 6.5%
doesn't sound very "free" to me. It also seems to circumvent the usual
C&P controls.

Free, presumably, to set up rather than to use.

The entry level product yes. Ones requiring a terminal have a hefty
subscription.

As for C&P controls, those are at the option of the retailer, not the
card company. The retailer is liable for fraud on the transaction if
they do not use C&P for it. Some other retailers still choose not to
use C&P - airport car parks and the M6 Toll are two examples of this,
where C&P is not used because throughput is more important than fraud
risk.

If you are entering card details into effectively a mobile phone app
it's much more like a cardholder-not-present transaction. Not even doing
a swipe.

But given that it is possible to produce a card reader that can verify
a PIN and use the card's encryption so cheaply that the banks throw
them out like there's no tomorrow, and a good number of people these
days have smartphones (most of the minicab companies seem to use a
smartphone app for dispatch these days rather than a radio), it would
seem there is a gap in the market for someone to make an inexpensive
USB device for accepting Chip & PIN payments in connection with a
mobile app.

I expect they'd be susceptible to trivial man-in-the-middle attacks on
the USB cable. So it's not clear what they would be proving to anyone.
But the idea of using a gadget to verify that the cardholder knows the
PIN (but doing the rest as before) seems to have some legs.

On the other hand they have a C&P terminal which they say comes with a
5% surcharge, while recommending drives to claim the surcharge is 10%.
It gets worse and worse!

Like Ryanair the taxi driver is at liberty to surcharge what he likes,
though I think a claim that he is charged that is immoral. To me,
actual cost plus usual overall profit margin %age is reasonable.

I'm not so sure. My last minicab ride was quoted in advance as flat-rate
£58, but the driver asked for £60. From previous encounters the extra £2
is to pay the iniquitous airport "kiss and ride" parking fee. I'm in two
minds as to whether I should be paying this, or the cab firm absorbing
it.

Some of the difficulty arises because the airport discourages drivers
"hovering" anywhere else, eg beside the approach roads, while the driver
ascertains whether the airport has held up their passengers in
immigration and baggage claim or not (a significant conflict of interest
for the airport to do these efficiently, when delay cranks up the car
parking revenue). So as long as it's towards the lower end of the
potential fees, the cab driver can't actually avoid paying it.

So assuming I'm happy with the £60, I don't think there should be any
further surcharge, unless I pay a tip. And that'll depend a lot on
whether they were there on time, whether they drove safely and whether
or not they spent the whole trip complaining about women drivers and how
they should be [barefoot presumably] at home in the kitchen instead
(yes, one of the drivers did just that).
--
Roland Perry

In message
, at
05:54:50 on Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Neil Williams
remarked:
On the other hand they have a C&P terminal which they say comes with a
5% surcharge, while recommending drives to claim the surcharge is 10%.
It gets worse and worse!

Actually I just looked at their site, and they do not appear to do
anything of the sort.

What they do is charge a surcharge of 5% themselves, which the taxi
driver does not see.

Are you sure, I read it as being put onto whatever cost the trip was,
plus an optional extra surcharge by the driver. That's why it's a
surcharge rather than a commission (which would mean the driver got 95%
of the fee).
--
Roland Perry

On Sep 14, 4:04*pm, Roland Perry wrote:

What they do is charge a surcharge of 5% themselves, which the taxi
driver does not see.

Are you sure, I read it as being put onto whatever cost the trip was,
plus an optional extra surcharge by the driver. That's why it's a
surcharge rather than a commission (which would mean the driver got 95%
of the fee).

Sorry, I worded that badly. I meant what you said, i.e. by "does not
see" I meant "does not get".

My point was that the company's website doesn't appear to encourage
drivers to lie about who makes the charge.

Neil

On Sep 14, 4:01*pm, Roland Perry wrote:

If you are entering card details into effectively a mobile phone app
it's much more like a cardholder-not-present transaction. Not even doing
a swipe.

Not really, it's a cardholder-present transaction if you key the
number in and the cardholder is present (as used to happen regularly
when the stripes wore out).

I assume if validating that way a signature would not be a bad idea -
but M6 Toll etc clearly show it not to be required.

I expect they'd be susceptible to trivial man-in-the-middle attacks on
the USB cable.

In what way? If all verification goes on in the device (as it does
with those bank-issued things) all you'd be able to intercept would be
the card number and expiry date, which you can read from the card
anyway. The USB conversation would be "is the PIN OK" - "Yes/No".
Actually, I bet you could do it with one of those bank thingys if you
knew the checksum calculation.

A fake device would, I suppose, be a risk given the reputation of the
taxi industry.

I'm not so sure. My last minicab ride was quoted in advance as flat-rate
£58, but the driver asked for £60. From previous encounters the extra £2
is to pay the iniquitous airport "kiss and ride" parking fee. I'm in two
minds as to whether I should be paying this, or the cab firm absorbing
it.

It is usual throughout the world for tolls, parking charges etc to be
at the customer's expense.

So assuming I'm happy with the £60, I don't think there should be any
further surcharge, unless I pay a tip. And that'll depend a lot on
whether they were there on time, whether they drove safely and whether
or not they spent the whole trip complaining about women drivers and how
they should be [barefoot presumably] at home in the kitchen instead
(yes, one of the drivers did just that).

Yet those things are basic expectations, and you should be getting a
discount if they don't deliver, not paying extra if they do!

That's why I hate the way tipping has gone, particularly in the US
where it's worse.

Neil

Neil Williams wrote:

I assume if validating that way a signature would not be a bad idea -
but M6 Toll etc clearly show it not to be required.


M6 Toll doesn't require a signature or a PIN because it has an
alternative route for recovering the money - number plate recognition
cameras.

On Sep 14, 5:14*pm, Bruce wrote:

M6 Toll doesn't require a signature or a PIN because it has an
alternative route for recovering the money - number plate recognition
cameras. *

True, as do airport car parks.

Neil

In message
, at
08:01:04 on Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Neil Williams
remarked:
I expect they'd be susceptible to trivial man-in-the-middle attacks on
the USB cable.

In what way? If all verification goes on in the device (as it does
with those bank-issued things) all you'd be able to intercept would be
the card number and expiry date, which you can read from the card
anyway. The USB conversation would be "is the PIN OK" - "Yes/No".
Actually, I bet you could do it with one of those bank thingys if you
knew the checksum calculation.

But the conversation has to include the card number (or it could be any
card in the reader). The "yes" is so easy to fake in these circumstances
it's a meaningless question for the bank at the other end to be asking.

A fake device would, I suppose, be a risk given the reputation of the
taxi industry.

A skimming device, anyway.

I'm not so sure. My last minicab ride was quoted in advance as flat-rate
£58, but the driver asked for £60. From previous encounters the extra £2
is to pay the iniquitous airport "kiss and ride" parking fee. I'm in two
minds as to whether I should be paying this, or the cab firm absorbing
it.

It is usual throughout the world for tolls, parking charges etc to be
at the customer's expense.

Not a blank cheque though. The drop-off/pick-up area at Birmingham is £1
for the first 20 minutes, then £3 for every 15 minutes after that. If
the taxi arrives when your flight was scheduled to land, and it's an
hour late, plus 30 minutes to get baggage, you'd get a bill of £16!
--
Roland Perry

In message
, at
07:55:05 on Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Neil Williams
remarked:
My point was that the company's website doesn't appear to encourage
drivers to lie about who makes the charge.

It seems to encourage drivers to claim it was 10% when it was in fact
5%.
--
Roland Perry