Unauthorized Use of Credit Card

[Harold99]

We have just the OP's account of what happened, and it's not very detailed. While of course the credit card issuers do often reverse the charges in this kind of situation, it does not happen all the time. I've seen two such instances where the credit card issuer refused to do so. So my answer accounted for that possibility. As you yourself acknowledged, even you can't say with 100% certainty that the issuer absolutely will reverse the charges. Certainly he should ask the issuer to do that, as I indicated in my first reply. And hopefully it will take care of it. But if it doesn't, then he does have other possible remedies.

Neither you nor I know exactly what the the thieves did or what information they have. While the CC should be canceled immediately and a new card promptly issued with a different card number, that does not always prevent further fraud against CC holder. I know several people who were unfortunately victims of identity theft and got hit with fraudulent CC transactions. They closed the accounts and got those charges reversed. But that was just the start of their problems as the thieves had enough information to then go out and open new accounts which then ended up causing them all kinds of problems. If a police report, which in my experience making a similar report myself and took just 15 minutes of my time, might head off that kind of trouble, I think it worthwhile do. Thus, when I had that problem I made that police report. It didn't take much time and didn't cost any money. So what's the real downside of doing it?

The difference here is that you apparently would just act on what you think the most likely way to resolve the problem is and leave it at that. I, on the other hand, look at all the possibilities of what might occur and do what I think would be reasonable to deal with all of them. Many years in life and in law practice have taught me that sometimes the less likely outcomes do in fact happen, and when I see that possibility I find that that a little ounce of prevention can be worth a pound of cure, as the old saying goes. You live your life your way, I'll live mine my way. When discussing things with clients or people on this board, I generally will point out all the possibilities and then they can decide from there how to live their lives. But at least that way they make the choice more fully informed about the options.

Sorry to hear that. But you must recognize that what happened to you isn't the only way identity theft and fraud occur.

Your response is a clear display why I would never go against an attorney in any courtroom in front of a jury. I believe you could discredit Mother Thersea to a bag of trash if you were paid to do so. In my trial the only people that saw me as 100% at fault was the jury because they only knew what the defense lawyer told them, as my lawyer came ill prepared to defend me against him. How this applies is that an event can be viewed by the general public a certain way, but what we do everyday can be colored by a skilled attorney to appear totally reckless to the point is being stupid. Much the same way our politicians play us.

I'm hopping on my bike to climb a mountain right now, maybe I'll finish my thoughts later. But yes, I think you are an oral magician. And to a lawyer, that is a compliment.

Oh, one last thing before I leave on my ride. I know four people that have seen UFO's clearly right in front of them. The US Navy has even come out and said they are real. Yet I would never try to discredit someone for not taking the subject seriously. IOW, we believe and live our lives as we wish. And there are those who get paid to make us look like fools in any aspect of our lives.

[Taxing Matters]

Your response is a clear display why I would never go against an attorney in any courtroom in front of a jury. I believe you could discredit Mother Thersea to a bag of trash if you were paid to do so. In my trial the only people that saw me as 100% at fault was the jury because they only knew what the defense lawyer told them, as my lawyer came ill prepared to defend me against him. How this applies is that an event can be viewed by the general public a certain way, but what we do everyday can be colored by a skilled attorney to appear totally reckless to the point is being stupid. Much the same way our politicians play us.

More attacks against me and rants against lawyers in general. How does that help the OP with his issue? The answer, of course, is that it doesn't. You attack me when I haven't attacked you. And you say you have higher ethics than lawyers? I don't see the evidence for that here.

[RJR]

Oh, one last thing before I leave on my ride. I know four people that have seen UFO's clearly right in front of them. The US Navy has even come out and said they are real.

We all live in a yellow submarine Harold.

[Harold99]

More attacks against me and rants against lawyers in general. How does that help the OP with his issue? The answer, of course, is that it doesn't. You attack me when I haven't attacked you. And you say you have higher ethics than lawyers? I don't see the evidence for that here.

Sorry for offending you but you have unwarranted thin skin.

You are beginning to think that the text you put up on this board is you...the actual you. And what I write here is me...the actual me. But is isn't. It's not even close. So I cannot attack the actual you. Only the virtual you. In this new world of communicating this way, we should never lose site of the big difference.

Why do you suppose I do not care what these other senior members think of me. It's because they don't even know me. But I know me very well, and there isn't a single person who meets me that doesn't like me, yet here I am the devil and the virtual guys here are enraged at the virtual me. Why, because they think I am my writing. Therefore, it is impossible for me to attack the actual you so you should never think I can offend the actual you, and you should never feel offended. Now if I knew you, that might change things a bit.

[Taxing Matters]

Why do you suppose I do not care what these other senior members think of me.

If you didn't care you'd not have demanded apologies from people here when you've felt offended from a post. And yet you have done just that before. So I don't really buy that you don't care. In any event, what I'm pointing out is that your attacking posts don't match the kind of ethical person you've claimed to be.

and there isn't a single person who meets me that doesn't like me

Perhaps you are generally a likeable person in the flesh. But even the most likeable people are not universally liked. It would be most remarkable indeed that there wasn't at least one person out there who met you and didn't like you. Of course, he or she may not have told you that. People tend to act nice to those they meet regardless of they really think.

[Harold99]

If you didn't care you'd not have demanded apologies from people here when you've felt offended from a post. And yet you have done just that before. So I don't really buy that you don't care. In any event, what I'm pointing out is that your attacking posts don't match the kind of ethical person you've claimed to be.

I don't believe I have ever "demanded an apology" from anyone here. Furthermore, I rip on a few bad apples here, so why wouldn't I expect grief back in return? As is done to me everyday if you keep up with these threads. So if you haven't gathered that I have thick skin and tenacity by now, you aren't keeping up.

Perhaps you are generally a likeable person in the flesh. But even the most likeable people are not universally liked. It would be most remarkable indeed that there wasn't at least one person out there who met you and didn't like you. Of course, he or she may not have told you that. People tend to act nice to those they meet regardless of they really think.

Funny how you ignored my 'thin skin' theory and make it about me.

What I said about Mother Theresa, you are doing that to me in the above paragraph. Just imagine if my life was as public as Mother Theresa's, you could discredit the crap out of me...just like that other lawyer did to win. So sure people dislike me, but not people I respect.

If you had a bone to pick with contractors and wanted to gripe about them, I would understand because a lot of them are bad. But I know I am not part of that bad group, so I wouldn't feel any association with your gripes. You however seem to think it is your duty to defend all lawyers and think I am referring to you personally when I do it. You would be wrong because I am aware there are very good lawyers out there.

Finally, you are a skilled, trained and practiced debater. When you and I exchange I see the tactics you employ, which are slick. Yet when you engage in debate with a layperson you like to appear like you have no specially advantage, training or skills. It is similar to a layperson getting in a fistfight with a pro boxer. After he beats him, he'd say it was a fair fight and it actually proved something.

Ben Shapiro is one of the most skilled debaters around. I watched a video on the seven tactics he employs to be so effective. It was very interesting stuff that you lawyers are taught. IOW, the wrong person can win by using refined debate tactics.