Trades people on the fiddle

[Huge]

Once evasion gets below a few percent, it isn't worth chasing down.

The most feathers for the least hissing, remember.

[Bob Eager]

What a good idea.

[Tim Streater]

The "shame" aspect appears to have had no effect on Vodafone and is unlikely to do so. I agree that the alleged comedian has backed down but there's plenty more where he came from.

They could be implemented for the future. And if that is not done, then more cases will occur in the future which will cue more pointless sheep-like noises. Me, I don't have any ideas because I don't know the law in question at all (except where it pertains to my personal situation). If you have some ideas, then let's hear them, ffs. Then we could all at least agree on the practicality and start lobbying our MPs etc. How else d'ye think change will occur?

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

Quick finger/toe print gathering by forensic bods.

[Jethro_uk]

Permission has nothing to do with it. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards are designed to ensure the security of payment card data usage by organisations. It covers things like storage of card numbers, and access to those numbers. Holding easily recovered card data is a big no-no, and could potentially expose an organisation to a fine at the least. Many companies prefer to outsource the actual taking of payments to reduce their exposure to PCI-DSS requirements. I worked on one such project a while ago, plugging Worldpay into a webstore.

The regulations also cover the physical security of call centres - disallowing cameras and mobile phones, and the operation of any voice- recording software to ensure card numbers recited over the phone cannot be easily retrieved.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Jethro_uk escribió:

Sam Hallam.

That was Bananaballs. Sutcliffe got her award reduced from 600k to 60k, not sure about the refund. Why would she have got one?

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Grimly Curmudgeon escribió:

Horrible job for those that had to do it.

[John Rumm]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the difficulties with much so called "anti avoidance" legislation (i.e. laws that attempt to make something you have deemed legal in one bit legislation illegal under another), is they frequently are retrospective in nature[1]. Which not only sets a very worrying legal precedent, but also leaves the general populous with the strong impression that HMRC are not playing fair. Once that mindset is endemic, the general reaction will become what's good for the goose etc.

[1] i.e. you start with the premiss that I know we said x was legal then, but that was before we saw how you were going to use it. Hence we have now decided that x was not legal after all.

[Huge]

Good. It's their job to legally maximise shareholder return. "Shame" has nothing to do with it.

[Huge]

No.

The number doesn't belong to the cardholder.

[Mike Barnes]

Tim Streater :

I understand that in Sweden, Norway, and Finland, everyone's tax return is published, every year. Less secrecy here would stimulate and inform debate, and might make some people less keen on making strenuous efforts to avoid paying tax.

[Huge]

Which, for the edification of interested bystanders is downloadable here;

have to register, but just do what everyone else does; lie.

[Man at B&Q]

I have no problem at all and would do it myself if I had the funds to justify it. I do haver a problem with the state of tax law in this country.

MBQ

[Tim Streater]

Why should it do that?

[Mike Barnes]

Thanks, that's very interesting. It's reassuring (and not altogether surprising) that card security is taken so seriously.

My next stab at solving this problem would be a barcode sticker that I could attach to my card. I'd present that for scanning rather than sticking a loyalty card in a slot. Whether any business would bother is another question: I think that, unlike me, many people *like* accumulating large numbers of cards in their wallet or purse.

[Jethro_uk]

No. When it emerged that Private Eye *had* published the truth (that Sutcliffe had been paid for here story) did she give the money back.

Although it does highlight the fact that in the UK, truth is no defence to libel.

[Owain]

Tesco do keyfob clubcards.

Has the advantage that if you lose your keys you have a chance of getting them back if someone hands them in to Tesco.

Owain

[Tim Streater]

Why might it do that?

[Mike Barnes]

That's interesting but I'd rather not have a key fob either. I suppose if it's a barcode (I think I might have seen one now that you mention it) I could copy it onto a sticker.

But I was envisioning something that had wider applicability than just one supermarket. Thinking aloud here - a barcode that I could link to any loyalty card account(s) and I could use to register purchases.

[Mike Barnes]

Tim Streater :

Because (I'm guessing) the use of highly artificial tax-reduction schemes might be obvious from the return, and this might be something that the person would rather not have made public.