A quick recap of major players involved in payment transactions :
1. Customer
2. Issuer Bank — holding the customer’s bank account
3. Payment Networks — Visa, Mastercard, NPCI, etc
4. Merchant
5. Acquirer Bank — holding the merchant’s bank account
In simple terms, Payments Fraud is the one where someone made unauthorized payments/purchases. Though the liability of fraud differs(customer/merchant/banks etc) on a case-to-case basis, someone in the payment system has to finally bare the brunt and mark the money as lost in their respective books.
Fraud is a global issue that affects not only individuals but also organizations — merchants, banks, insurance companies, and who so ever is dealing with payments. Payments frauds have been crippling every country across the globe and according to recent studies, the epidemic of payment fraud has been growing over the recent years.
When it comes to payments, there are 2 major elements –
1. FALSE NEGATIVE — when an act of fraud goes undetected and through the payment system
2. FALSE POSITIVE — when a faulty fraud detection system blocks a legitimate transaction.
Anti-fraud solutions and fraudsters are caught in a cat-and-mouse game. Both have been leveraging technological innovations to meet their underlying need and eventually adding to the cost of combating fraud.
Whenever we come across the term COST, our first thought is that it’s a mere cumulation of expenses incurred in producing or building a product or service. However, in financial terms, the cost is segregated into — Direct Cost and Indirect Cost. The majority of the time, indirect costs are neglected when it comes to deriving the actual cost of a project due to the difficulty associated with deriving a cost-effective methodology for the assignment of indirect costs.
When it comes to defining the cost associated with fraud, organizations generally tend to consider the amount lost in the fraud process. These numbers are a significant percentage of the topline revenue. Moreover, it’s a concerning fact that even less than 20% of businesses are able to fully recover the amount from unauthorized transactions and other fraudulent activities.
Apart from the obvious Direct Cost — fraud amount value — associated with the transaction, the Indirect Cost often goes unnoticed.
Cost of Combating Fraud: Huge infrastructure and resources — manual as well as technological are deployed by organizations in payment authentication and authorization. The cumulative loss arising from both False Positive and False negative scenarios burn a larger hole in terms of operational efficiency.
Cost to Reputation: Businesses incurs huge cost when it comes to building a reputation of trust through the marketing function which employs varied techniques to increase the perceived value of a product or service over time. Undetected frauds and consequent delays in grievance redressal often leave the customer/merchant with a bad experience with their respective banks and also with the payment entities involved in the process.
Cost of declining Genuine transactions: High False positive rates can leave the customers/merchants frustrated. Organizations leave no stone unturned through sales and marketing and customer support to acquire and retain a customer. In the era of fierce competition, if one thinks Customer acquisition is hard, think about the retention of a frustrated customer.
It is somewhat now possible to measure fraud and error losses but one needs to surely factor in the Indirect Costs in order to make a proper judgment about a proportionate level of investment to be made in reducing them through the deployment of anti-fraud tools. Direct costs associated with fraud are just the tip of the iceberg and give even less than half a picture of the menace lying underneath.
Author:
Sujit Kumar Mahato, Product Manager
Wibmo A PayU/Naspers FinTech Company