Cases from Apple generally shipping before iPhone X, may cause problems with some banks
Apple appears to be shipping cases separately than the iPhone X -- with some reports seeing expected deliveries of the protective enclosures more than a month before the sought-after OLED phone arrives.
With the expected heavy demand for the iPhone X, ship times have slipped far into December. Given that Apple doesn't charge credit cards on file until the shipment process reaches the preparation phase, customers are likely to see multiple charges potentially a month apart.
A large hold on a credit card will in all likelihood be charged for the case worth a small fraction of the selling price first, with the larger charge being a different line-item later when the iPhone X is ready to ship.
AppleInsider reached out to several banking institutions with them mostly saying that if customers have an existing relationship with Apple that the gap in charges will likely pose no problem. However, we were advised that if there is not that history, that customers should contact a support representative at the bank in question to tell them that a second charge associated with the transaction is coming later in the month to ensure that there are no problems that would potentially hold up delivery.
The Equifax data breach, and enhanced transaction security implemented in the wake of the hack were reasons we were given for potential problems with the small amount being posted in place of the large initial approval, and a later charge of the iPhone X sale price.
We were also told that users who used Apple Pay to execute the transaction shouldn't see any problem.
With the expected heavy demand for the iPhone X, ship times have slipped far into December. Given that Apple doesn't charge credit cards on file until the shipment process reaches the preparation phase, customers are likely to see multiple charges potentially a month apart.
A large hold on a credit card will in all likelihood be charged for the case worth a small fraction of the selling price first, with the larger charge being a different line-item later when the iPhone X is ready to ship.
AppleInsider reached out to several banking institutions with them mostly saying that if customers have an existing relationship with Apple that the gap in charges will likely pose no problem. However, we were advised that if there is not that history, that customers should contact a support representative at the bank in question to tell them that a second charge associated with the transaction is coming later in the month to ensure that there are no problems that would potentially hold up delivery.
The Equifax data breach, and enhanced transaction security implemented in the wake of the hack were reasons we were given for potential problems with the small amount being posted in place of the large initial approval, and a later charge of the iPhone X sale price.
We were also told that users who used Apple Pay to execute the transaction shouldn't see any problem.
Comments
Yes, ID theft is a thing, and individuals bear a duty of diligence. There are draconian consequences to being a victim of a crime, not all of which can be remedied. But banks are peddling bullshit when they claim their procedures are to protect their customers. They've made us their fraud protection department to protect them.
What can the bank do: Refuse the second charge on grounds of possible fraud.
Credit limit: Don't disagree, but to say that it isn't happening isn't realistic.
Refuse the charge? With a company like Apple that is probably not going to happen. Usually they will send a “call for confirmation” message to the retailer. In this case I don’t see why it would look suspicious.
As for the credit issue, of course it happens. I wasn’t arguing that it doesn’t happen. What I’m saying is that anyone with a $1000 credit limit shouldn’t be buying a $1000 iPhone. In fact, regardless of what one’s limit is, using more than 50% of it in a single shot is usually a bad idea. Don’t say the old man didn’t warn you, kids!