Wave-and-pay card fraud on the increase as elderly are exposed as easy target
“WAVE and pay” fraud is on the rise, figures reveal, with experts warning statistics could mask the true scale of the problem as victims do not always come forward.
City of London Police data, obtained by The Daily Telegraph, reveals 5,415 reports of contactless-related fraud since 2013.
It shows a significant increase since 2015, when the wave-and-pay limit – the amount at which a purchase can be made without a pin – was raised from £20 to £30.
There were just 31 reports of contactless crime in 2013, but that grew to 2,739 between April 2017 and January this year, the figures indicate.
The total value of reported theft across those years was £3.5million, police figures show, with an average reported loss of £652.
The force said the largest single report, from a bank highlighting an issue with multiple fraudulent contactless payments, gave a reported loss of £400,000.
Gary Fitzgerald, chief executive at Action on Elder Abuse, said he was concerned the figures might indicate a bigger problem as vulnerable and elderly people who were less likely to check online banking or regularly read statements were less likely to spot fraud.
“Based on our experience of financial theft, the sort of crimes we see include people going in as carers or periodically shopping for people, gaining access to a pin, and then making small withdrawals from an ATM on a regular basis and draining someone’s account. They do it over a period of months when a dependent elderly person isn’t looking at their accounts,” he told the Telegraph.
“The thing about contactless for me is that instead of going and withdrawing that money, you simply tap that card and get the equivalent in goods or services.
“So what makes contactless a little more of a risk is they can secretly take the card, do a range of transactions on contactless, and put it back in the purse so nobody will ever know.”
Mr Fitzgerald added: “I can’t say I have seen that happening yet, but it is a logical progression.”
However, UK Finance, which works with police and represents the payment industry, said contactless fraud was comparatively three times lower than non-contactless fraud because of “robust security features” put in place by card companies, including requiring a pin number after a number of transactions.
Richard Koch, a UK Finance director, said the figures could be explained by a “phenomenal” surge in people using the cards. Mr Koch said most crimes were likely as a result of petty theft.
He said while he had heard of reports of mobile app technology being used by criminals to read details on the front of a card, the technology could not read the security number on the back and there had been no verified reports of it having been done to defraud customers.