Bank card flight: Are you refunded in the event of fraudulent contact without payment?

In the event of theft of your bank card, can you be reimbursed with contactless payments made before opposition? Many French people still ignore it, but the answer is yes! Explanations.

• 
  

  To safeguard
  
  
  

  Saved
  

Catch -up session. On the occasion of financial education week (from March 17 to 23, 2025), the editorial staff of Capital Return to some notions among the least well mastered by the French, if we stick to the latest study referring to the matter, “The investigation into financial education of the general public”conducted by the Banque de France and the CSA Institute in 2023. Conducted every two years on an OECD level (38 member states of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), this survey makes it possible to compare the level of financial knowledge of adults in these different countries.

Among the questions that posed the most difficulty, we find it: “In the event of theft of your bank card, are contactless payments before opposition reimbursed?”. In its report following this survey, the Banque de France indeed notes that “4 out of 10 French people know that they can be reimbursed with contactless payments in the event of theft of their bank card before opposition”. The right answer to this question (“Yes, (it is possible to be reimbursed) of the amount of the contested transaction, and any fees of any incidents”) has not even been given by 14% of respondents (18% in 2021 on the occasion of the previous edition), a quarter of the respondents believing that they will be reimbursed for disputed payments, but not the costs caused.

In principle, it is not possible to be completely reimbursed for payments made before the opposition

It must be recognized, however, that this response is necessarily of oneself: in principle, it is not possible to be reimbursed for payments made before having made opposition. Imagine a customer whose bank card has been stolen, and that the thief makes purchases on the Internet thanks to his secret code. In this case, the customer is not completely reimbursed payments made before having made opposition: “In the event of an unauthorized payment operation following the loss or theft of the payment instrument, the payer supports, before the information provided for in article L. 133-17 (the opposition, editor’s note), losses related to the use of this instrument, within the limit of a ceiling of 50 euros”provides article L133-19 of the monetary and financial code. In other words, a franchise of 50 euros payable by the customer applies before it is reimbursed from fraudulent payments made before the opposition.

>> Our service – achieve up to 300 euros in savings per year thanks to our banking tariff comparator

But that’s not all. The bank may also purely and simply not reimburse his client if she manages to prove that the latter was guilty of a “serious negligence” having led to reveal his secret code or the numbers of his bank card: this may be the case for example if he communicated this confidential information on the phone to a usurper or in response to an email. As this notion of “serious negligence” is not defined by the Monetary and Financial Code, your bank can therefore be tempted to take advantage of this legal vagueness so as not to reimburse you even if you have made no mistakes. In this case in charge of contesting the decision of your establishment, using a specialized lawyer if necessary.

The particular case of contactless payments

However, the case of contactless payments is special. Indeed, “There cannot be any negligence, just or serious, from the customer with contactless payment”recalls Laurent Denis, lawyer in the Place Lawyer. “The customer is not responsible if the bank does not require payment authentication. However, this is obviously the case specifically for contactless payments, part of which can be carried out without secret code ”specifies this lawyer specializing in banking law. Consequently, the customer must therefore be reimbursed for payments made, including before the opposition.

However, as Maître Laurent Denis said, “Contactless payment is not specifically mentioned in banking law”. It is therefore advisable to check in your bank card contract the reimbursement methods. For a classic visa, it is clear that“In the event of payment in” contactless “mode with the use of the physical card, the transmitter (the bank) does not apply the strong authentication devices of the card holder (validation via secret code, telephone, voice or facial identification, etc., editor’s note)”. “The card holder does not bear any financial consequences if the unauthorized payment transaction has been carried out without the issuer requires strong authentication of the card holder”. In other words, with this means of payment, you are fully reimbursed any fraudulent payments.