WO2013163721A1

WO2013163721A1 - Secured telephone payment method

Info

Publication number: WO2013163721A1
Application number: PCT/CA2012/050289
Authority: WO
Inventors: Meyer LALLOUZ
Original assignee: Lallouz Meyer
Priority date: 2012-05-03
Filing date: 2012-05-03
Publication date: 2013-11-07

Abstract

A method and its corresponding system are provided for payment processing of business transactions conducted over the phone. The invention essentially consists of a two-way secure application specifically designed to be used with the telephone system, which will operate as a safe-keeping of the payment on behalf of the client until the merchandise has been delivered and the client has also had, at least in some embodiments of the invention, the option of deciding whether to keep it or return it.

Description

Secured Telephone Payment Method

Technical Field

Providing a novel method of payment processing for business transactions conducted over the phone using a specially designed two-way secure platform system and protocol.

Background Art

Many businesses make use of the telephone to sell products to individuals or other businesses. They are commonly referred to as telemarketers. Telemarketing agents will usually initiate contact with prospective customers, calling up those customers and offering to sell them whatever it is that they sell, which is commonly referred to as cold calling. The potential clients are usually either picked randomly from a phonebook directory or selected on the basis of some delimitating factors or criteria.

A problem which often arises in this particular branch of business is that even though a salesperson might have managed to convince the other party of the benefit(s) of his/her product(s), and the latter is actually interested in buying it at the agreed-upon price, they still face an important obstacle when it comes to agreeing upon the method of payment: to obtain payment from the client at that time is very difficult, if not close to impossible: most customers will never accept to give over their credit card number to someone on the phone, even if to a reputable and trusted company. On the other hand, should the seller choose to send the merchandise to the client despite the fact that the latter has not yet paid for it, expecting to obtain payment from the client when the merchandise has been delivered, or at some later time, the seller simply risks not receiving the agreed-upon payment, should the client end up not paying (a risk a telemarketer is sometimes nevertheless willing to take, depending on the value of the merchandise, and considering the fact that a potential client could eventually become a long-term client, an opportunity which the seller does not want to miss...), and if ever the client were to reside at a distance or in another country, to obtain payment (or even ask for the merchandise to be returned, as a fact,) would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, and, in any case, not a worthwhile investment for the seller to pursue.

On investigating upon how these problems are perceived and how they are attempted to be solved, one finds out that in many cases, there seems to be a misconception with respect to the structure of the business, which is at the origin of the problem, (and which we want to attempt to clarify in the present invention,) as we can see, for example, from U.S. Patent No. 2692978, page 18, lines 12-15: 'In most instances, the payor and/or payee has a desire to complete the payment as timely as possible, while the financial institution handling the payment has a desire to delay the remittance/settlement for as long a time period as possible.' Similarly, we see how differently or oppositely the issue can be perceived and solved, as disclosed in prior art Netherlands Patent No. 2371168, page 11, line 25, through page 12, line 37 of the description, where the solution that is proposed is that the customer should provide to an intermediate transaction server at least some sort of 'proof of identity'...

[Rectified under Rule 91 13.06.2012]
On another hand, analyzing prior art literature in the field, one will find a number of patents that have managed to solve either one or more aspects of the issue, but never all of them at once, as will be proposed and disclosed in the present invention. For example, reading through U.S. Patent No. 2332715, one finds a method similar to the one presented here, except that, as will be outlined in the summary, it is lacking the finer details of: a) proposing the tool to the telemarketer instead of the buyer, and b) using the delivery element as the authorizing factor for the transaction. Another very close art model, for most practical purposes, that equally succeeds at solving at least part of the problem, is presented in U.S. Patent No. 2465331, which uses a pathway similar to the one presented here, and achieves just about the same kind of results with respect to satisfaction and protection of both buyer and seller, except which is accomplished according to a framework in which action (and not time as well, as in the present method) is the determining factor. Yet another prior art model, missing the notions of time as well as those of applying the method to telemarketing, is described indetail in U.S. Patent No. 2059078.

Disclosure

Hereby is presented, through general terms, which are to be developed further in the description, a solution which would appeal to both the buyer and the seller. Briefly, the present invention consists of a specially designated, designed and trusted application that is adapted to the telephone system, which will be used as a safe-keeping of the payment on behalf of the client until the merchandise has been delivered and the client has also had, at least in some embodiments of the invention, the option of deciding whether to keep it or return it.

Modes of Invention

In the present model, an automated transaction telephone service will be made available to the telemarketer to be used in a second communications link/routing which will either take the form of a transferred-to system, in one embodiment of the invention, or an imbedded conferenced-call system, in another embodiment of the invention, in which the consenting client will be guided by an automated system operator through the steps of entering, either manually through the touch-tone keypad or through (interactive) speech recognition their credit card information, which may be accompanied by some sort of digital signature, which may include the use of random numbers and/or first, second or even third degree level of encryption, in order to have the funds transferred to a virtual safe account of the system, which may possess key and authentication capabilities. The system platform may be viewed as a kind of virtual POS (point-of-sale terminal). The system may additionally include merchant validation. The system may include a form of funds transfer confirmation, identifier or receipt. The system may have facsimile-specific additional options and features. The system may include destination and/or other transaction information entry and storage. The system method may be implemented in real-time and may have some form of monitoring and/or recording of events applied to the sequence of time-related operations, either disclosed, or not, to the client. Finally, the system may feature integration of other applications within the transaction execution system.

[Rectified under Rule 91 13.06.2012]
At this point, the funds are being with held within the platform system, being neither available to one nor the other party of the transaction. The seller is informed by the platform system that the funds have indeed been transferred and are being kept in their possession until it eventually receives confirmation (perhaps through means of (ome form of) communication and/or arrangement between the delivery service and the transaction platform system) that the merchandise has been delivered.

The seller may now go about and send the merchandise. Once the delivery reaches its destination, the system platform is notified of it and, should the client not refuse the delivery then, (in which case the merchandise would be shipped back, (if applicable,) and the funds returned to the client,) a countdown is set in progress, (if applicable,) providing the client with a certain amount of time to decide whether to keep the merchandise or have it sent back (if applicable), after which the funds would automatically be made available to the seller. Should the client decide to return the merchandise to the seller, the funds that were being held by the platform system would be returned to the client.

Claims

Embodiments of the invention in which an exclusive property or privilege is claimed are defined as follows:

1. An automated telephone service designed to complete a credit card payment in the context of a telemarketing sale.
2. An automated service consisting of a telephone-adapted program, system and/or application.
[Rectified under Rule 91 13.06.2012]
3. Items being sold comprising any merchandise which necessitates physical delivery to customer.
4. The delivery including all forms of delivery services.
5. The payment including all forms of credit card payments.
6. The telephone service consisting of an automatic operator that will assist both seller and buyer through all the steps of the transaction.
7. The system, which is, in its more basic form, designed to function primarily through the use of the touch-tone capacity of the telephone keypad, may include (or consist of) more advanced voice-operated functions.
8. The transaction session, either in part(s) or in full, may or may not include the participation and/or listening of the telemarketer/seller.
9. The system may comprise all manners of protection and security, including: digital signatures, use of random numbers, single/multiple encryptions, etc., for all of the parties involved in the transaction which includes, at least, the telemarketer, the customer and the delivery service.
10. The system includes, amongst other services, a safe account of the virtual-electronic-digital type (and to which, or any other part of the system, may be associated key(s) and/or authentication(s) features of same type or nature) into which the funds of the customer's payment are deposited and held until the terms of agreement (which consist mainly of, though not limited to, a successful delivery and satisfaction of the customer,) authorize the service to pay the seller.
11. In the event of an unsuccessful transaction, defined as one where either the merchandise was not delivered, or the customer refused it at the time of delivery, or the customer decided to send it back, (when the terms of sale allow so), the funds are then returned to the customer by the system.
12. The system may furthermore include validations, confirmations, identifiers, receipts, recording, storing, monitoring, facsimile-specific features and any other kind of additional feature and/or future improvements of it, or any part of it.
13. Each feature of the system may be implemented in real-time, and may likewise either be known to, or hidden from, the customer, and perhaps also the seller and/or the delivery service.
14. The system may feature integration of other applications, alongside the main transaction execution application.
[Rectified under Rule 91 13.06.2012]
15. The sequence of steps that make up the transaction is:
1. Agreement of buyer and seller on terms of sale.
2. Connecting of the call to the transaction service (accessed by way of a third line/phone number).
3. Transfer of funds from the client to the service system. (Seller is informed of successful transfer and may now proceed with shipping of merchandise.) (End of call.)
4. Funds are being held by system while delivery is in progress.
5. Upon the delivery reaching destination, system is notified of either the refusal, if the terms of sale allow so, (in which case merchandise is shipped back to seller and the funds are returned to the client,) or acceptance of the merchandise by the client, in which latter case the funds are either immediately being made available to the seller, or at some later time, providing the client with the opportunity to decide whether to keep or return the merchandise, when such an option is included in the agreement.