Credit cards are ubiquitous in America, in which, many people that have credit cards need them in order to literally make ends meet on a weekly basis, so that, when their credit card is declined at a grocery store, or department store, or wherever, they often are in relatively dire straits because they do not have available to them, additional credit on their debit card or any other credit card, because they are already "maxed" out. This means, when a credit card holder is actually making a legitimate purchase and all previous purchases have also been legitimate, finds that their credit card is declined, it isn't necessarily just inconvenient, it can be somewhat catastrophic, for when you depend upon something that literally is your last line of defense, and it fails you, through no real fault of your own, that's a serious problem.
What makes a credit card that is declined, so upsetting especially to those that are absolutely dependent upon them, is that when a phone call is initiated by the holder of the credit card to the bank of record, in which, invariably during the conversation, the person representing the credit card issuer, will state, words to the effect that the card was declined or frozen, "for your protection", or "for your security", which may sound like the appropriate thing for them to say, it really often represents a rather weak smokescreen. The reason these words are so annoying, is that the credit card issuer denying you your credit when, in fact, all charges are legitimate, has precluded you from accomplishing the very things that you need to accomplish on that day. Further to the point, denial of credit at that particular date and time puts you in, at best, an embarrassing situation, and at worse, a literally hopeless one.
In point of fact, credit card rules in regards to fraudulent charges are quite fair to the consumer, in which, some credit card issuers do not hold their card holders liable for any fraudulent charges whatsoever, whereas others only hold the cardholder liable to the maximum amount permitted by federal law which is just $50. The upshot of this federal law, though, is that the issuer of the credit card is consequently, since they are on the line for the fraudulent charges, in a position in which they want to be very diligent in the protection of that credit so that they are not stuck with fraudulent charges that they cannot recover from either the merchant or the person that perpetrated the fraud to begin with. This means, that algorithms by the credit card issuer are created that in almost all cases, initiates the fraud alert, and that it is this algorithm that determines whether a pattern or charge necessitates the freezing of a particular person's credit card account. While that certainly makes sense, and certainly seems reasonable, it also means, that conservatively done, there will be a meaningful portion of fraud alerts that are "false" positives, which is obviously rather unfortunate for the credit card holder that has no illegitimate charges.
The thing is, the utilization of a credit card by individuals is never a right, it is a privilege, so other than contacting the credit card issuer and trying to resolve the issue in real time, consumers are at the mercy of the bank that has issued that credit card. That said, most people would be a bit more understanding of why credit card companies do this sort of thing, if instead of stating to the consumer that the reason the credit card was frozen was not for the protection of the consumer, but in actuality for the protection of the bank, because in reality, that is exactly what it is, because these credit card issuers are in the business of making money, and when some charge or activity is flagged, whether wrongly or rightly, they want to stop it in its tracks, because it's their money that is on the line, and that for them, is paramount.