1) Posted here was an apparent breach at a bank where I have a card.
2) Individual posted that their card was replaced.
3) I questioned the bank whether the apparent breach included me and why my card was not replaced.
4) Another poster jumped to conclusion due to a personal inability to comprehend and again attacked the poster not the post.

What, you can't read? You're fucking with the wrong person, Tom.

Uggg. I wonder how an individual will ever know if they have had their data compromised until some damaging event occurs?

New account numbers, otherwise it wouldn't have been of interest, or of relevance to the thread.

Come to think of it we did get new Visa cards with new numbers, I wondered why, we have had the same number for many years. But our replacement coincided with the regular exploration dates. Maybe they are just going to do the replacement numbers as normal exploration dates come around. Maybe not to cause so much alarm or raise a flag.

Your assumption is that new account numbers are the only security method. By not making that assumption, I asked if they changed the account; or used some other security method to maintain the same account number. Apparently changing account numbers remain the only solution to a security breech.

Meanwhile, both TheMercenary and I have seen account numbers changed without any notification. According to CA law as assumed, we should be notified if a security breech was detected. If no security breech was detected, then why change the account numbers even before the existing card was to expire? This inverse exposes a question. Does the law have loopholes? Apparently nobody here knows.