World

Are Card-Not-Present Transactions Safe? We asked Platinum Payment Systems

Published

5 years ago

September 1, 2020

Card-Not-Present (CNP) transactions are generally known to be riskier than Card-Present transactions, as they leave both the customer and the merchant open for fraud.

Online shopping is no longer the future, it’s the present.

In fact, 75% of people worldwide shop online at least once a month! This is according to Statistica, who has also reported that eCommerce sales are predicted to go as high as $4.2 trillion by the end of 2020 and over $6.5 trillion by 2023.

It’s no surprise then, that Card-Not-Present (CNP) transactions have become all the more prevalent. But, what exactly are card-not-present transactions? And, are they safe?

What Are Card-Not-Present Transactions?

First thing’s first, you’re probably already familiar with traditional Card-Present transactions.

Card-Present transactions are when a customer swipes a credit card through a terminal or mobile swiper, and the payment is processed by a merchant processor that facilitates the transfer of funds from the customer’s bank account and into the merchant’s business bank account.

In effect, a Card-Not-Present transaction is pretty much the same thing — funds are transferred from a customer’s bank account to the merchant’s bank account by a ‘middleman’.

The only difference is that, because the transaction is happening virtually, there is no way of physically swiping a card through a terminal. Which basically means, that the transaction has to happen with the card not present.

Evidently, this changes a lot of things. Including how the payment is settled.

Because, CNP transactions are initiated and authorized with the customer inputting their card credentials (their account number, card expiration date, card security code, etc.) through a payment gateway available on the merchant’s eCommerce store.

And, unfortunately, because it’s harder to prove card ownership with CNP transactions, it’s definitely riskier than traditional CP transactions. After all, with CP transactions, at the very least, the card’s physical presence allows for a more direct authentication process.

What Are the Risks of CNP Transactions?

As described above, because CNP transactions are virtually facilitated, there are more definite risks involved. And, the most common types of these risks are:

Credit Card Fraud: Credit card fraud is more likely to occur for CNP transactions because it’s much easier to steal relevant credit card information (the account number, expiration date, security code, etc.) than it is to physically steal a card. This type of fraud definitely affects the card owner — who may not even notice that their card is being used to purchase items without their consent. But it can affect merchants as well — as it could lead to chargebacks.
Chargeback Fraud: A chargeback fraud occurs when a customer purchases and then receives goods and services from a merchant and then has their payment returned to them by the bank because of an issue with the transaction. In this case, the merchant is at an obvious loss — as they lose out on both their product and the payment.

Either type of fraud is incredibly damaging for the merchant, and potentially damaging for the customer as well — which is why it is so important that you know how to protect your business, and secure your customers, from these types of risk.

The Bottom Line: How Can You Protect Your Business from The Risk of Card-Not-Present Transactions?

Fraud is an incredibly real danger. And, as mentioned, the risks of fraud are definitely higher for Card-Not-Present transactions. Fortunately, however, it’s not all bad. There are ways of mitigating these risks — whether you’re the buyer or a merchant.

For merchants, as an example, you can hire a merchant processor like Platinum Payment Systems, who offer both fraud and chargeback protection. And thus, can help support you with navigating through the risks involved.

In fact, in a recent interview, one of Platinum Payment Systems’ managing founders, Jed Morley, said: “Our goal with PlatPay, is to help others solve their payment processing problems and support them with whatever else they need to handle the risks and balance the different types of payments they receive.”

And so, again, while CNP transactions are not quite up to the same security standards as CP transactions are at present, there are ways of protecting yourself and your business from the risks. It’s just a matter of finding a solution that will work for you.

World

Criminal probe focussed on Mehtas shipping business

Published

3 weeks ago

August 6, 2025

Jonathan Grilli

From Monitoring Desk

DUBAI: An Asian family linked with the shipping business is facing criminal investigation in several jurisdictions including in Dubai and Far East where the family’s companies are under active investigation now, according to the authorities in three countries.

Sanjay and Gaurav Mehta, through their companies Best Oasis Ltd in Dubai and Priya Blue Industries in Gujarat, are facing investigations over money-laundering suspicions and suspected links to the Russian oil sector, sanctioned by the western countries, sources shared.

Sanjay and Gaurav Mehta, through their companies Best Oasis Ltd in Dubai and Priya Blue Industries in Gujarat have projected an image of environmental responsibility in ship recycling. They have tout certifications, attend global summits, and positioned themselves as ESG-compliant but their business practices have come under intense probe now. Their operations reportedly involve dismantling high-risk ships, using cash transactions, and leveraging political connections to avoid accountability, a source shared looking into the companies’ affairs. The investigation is being conducted in Dubai and the Far East.

The investigators are looking at the Mehtas operations dating back to 2006 when they came to attention of the law enforcement for the first time. Priya Blue dismantled the “Blue Lady” in 2006, a vessel containing over 1,200 tons of asbestos and radioactive waste, despite protests and objections from Greenpeace. Later, the “Exxon Valdez,” notorious for a major oil spill, was renamed “Oriental Nicety” and dismantled by the Mehtas in Gujarat, drawing international attention. In recent years, their transactions have become less conspicuous but reportedly more hazardous.

In 2025, Best Oasis allegedly acquired and dismantled at least four vessels linked to sanctioned entities, including Iranian and Houthi-controlled networks. These weren’t obscure ships; they were designated under U.S. terrorism sanctions for their involvement in oil smuggling and arms transport. According to investigators, here are the details of the sanctioned ships dismantled by Best Oasis in 2025: IMO: 9155808, Name: NOLAN (SOLAN), Sanction: SDN (SDGT), Beaching: 31 Jan 2025, Plot 16; IMO: 9221657, Name: BLUEFINS, Sanction: SDN (SDGT); Beaching: 26 Feb 2025, Plot 16; IMO: 9105085, Name: CONTRACT II, Sanction: SDN risk, Beaching: Arrived mid-2025, Plot 27; IMO: 9209300, Name: GAMA II, Sanction: SDN (SDGT); and Beaching: Pending/Planned, Plot 34

All four vessels were reportedly dismantled in Alang on plots leased by proxy firms connected to the Mehtas. These short-term leases, approved on a ship-by-ship basis by the Gujarat Maritime Board, reportedly make regulatory oversight nearly impossible. Once dismantling is complete, plot registrations often lapse, leaving no long-term record, according to documents shared by the investigators in Dubai.

Rahul Mistry, a shipping compliance researcher, noted this as a growing pattern: “This is a pattern we’ve seen more frequently in the last two years sanctioned hulls arriving under the radar, processed fast, with no digital trace.”

Payments for these vessels reportedly bypassed normal financial channels. According to sources familiar with the deals, transactions were settled in cash, either on-site or through offshore handlers. One source described entire ship values being paid in foreign currency bundles, avoiding Indian and Dubai banking disclosures, said one of the investigators familiar with the matter.

A retired port official Mr. Akin Yadav, familiar with Alang and Gujarat Maritime Board approvals stated that short-term leases are routinely used to avoid scrutiny, adding, “It was never meant to be a permanent workaround. But it’s become one.”

Political connections also reportedly play a role. Union Minister Mansukh Mandaviya and Gujarat State Minister Jitu Vaghani have been linked to approvals granted for Best Oasis and its proxies. While there’s no direct evidence of personal gain, sources allege that both men used their influence to expedite approvals, slow down inquiries, and shield the companies from enforcement.

Despite these activities in India, Best Oasis is expanding under new branding. A recent joint venture in Japan with Hiroshi Abe is being marketed as a clean, regionally responsible recycling partner for Japanese shipowners.

Mariko Fujita, a Tokyo-based maritime consultant, observed, “They’re presenting themselves as a new entity with no reference to past controversies. But none of the underlying ownership or structure has changed.”

In Alang, the situation reportedly remains much the same. Plot numbers are reassigned, cash continues to circulate and the same network of breakers and handlers is reportedly involved. Individuals like Jayant Vanani (also known as Budhabhai Patel) and Ramesh Mendapara are frequently named in connection with specific beachings, including “Contract II” and “GAMA II.” Both have been previously linked to other shadow transactions involving distressed or sanctioned tonnage.

Several yards allegedly connected to Best Oasis, including Shantamani Ship Breakers and Sai Baba Ship Breakers, reportedly operate with minimal inspection, despite numerous reports of irregularities in worker safety, hazardous waste disposal, and compliance with Indian scrapping codes.

This system, according to multiple sources, appears to be intentionally designed to operate in plain sight with just enough paperwork to pass basic scrutiny but not enough to trigger meaningful enforcement. There is no indication that regulatory bodies including customs, port health officers, or environmental oversight panels have conducted full inspections of any of the sanctioned vessels listed. Most were reportedly cleared and dismantled within days of arrival.

Rahul Mistry said: “This isn’t merely a loophole; it’s reportedly a business model. Best Oasis and Priya Blue are allegedly running a high-volume, low-visibility operation that filters sanctioned, end-of-life ships through legal instruments to appear legitimate on paper. This reportedly involves routing untaxed funds and shielded actors through a well-connected political and industrial network. As global scrutiny of ESG practices intensifies, many of these activities are allegedly being whitewashed through new partnerships and branding, but the underlying mechanisms reportedly remain unchanged.”