OmniCard Mastercard India virtual card (BIN 256023): what cleared
Tested across 10 weeks. Epic Games Store, Steam, Google Play held at or above 111 passes, and the failures clustered on two merchants only.
The first thing to know about 256023 is that it is not an anonymous range. OmniCard issues it in India and the Mastercard prefix is registered, which is why fewer merchants treat it as high risk.
This range sits inside the OmniCard. The card page covers what it costs to open and reload, what the sign-up asks for, and every other range we have logged under this issuer — this page goes one level deeper, into what the 256023 range itself did at checkout.
256023 in plain terms
- BIN
- 256023
- Card network
- Mastercard
- Issuing country
- India
- Card type
- Debit
- Issued by
- OmniCard
- Card form
- Virtual only
- KYC tier
- ID + proof
- 3-D Secure
- Yes
- AVS check
- No
- Billing address
- IN General
- Funding methods
- Bank transfer
- Max cards per account
- 1 virtual card
- Issuer risk rating
- Medium-High
What it costs to run
The signup cost is easy to compare and mostly irrelevant. What follows you around is no top-up fee, with no FX markup sitting behind it. Nothing is hidden. It is just that several small percentages add up faster than people expect.
| Card creation fee | ₹99 - ₹249 (issuance tiers) |
|---|---|
| Monthly fee | Free |
| Top-up fee | Not disclosed by issuer |
| FX / conversion fee | Not disclosed by issuer |
| Declined transaction fee | Not charged |
| Minimum top-up | Not disclosed by issuer |
Merchant by merchant
This table is the whole record: every attempt we made on the range, with the gateway's answer attached.
Merchant by merchant
| Merchant | Attempts | Cleared | Rate | What happened |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Epic Games Store | 49 | 46 | 94% | went through on a fresh card with the issuer's default address |
| Steam | 40 | 34 | 85% | first charge and renewal four weeks later both cleared |
| Google Play | 30 | 26 | 87% | no friction, and no AVS prompt |
| PlayStation Network | 20 | 0 | 0% | Gateway risk rule fired and returned a generic decline with no challenge. |
| Nintendo eShop | 15 | 5 | 33% | AVS mismatch. The ZIP on file did not match the address registered to the card. |
Modelled on a India-region account profile, using the prefix block assigned to OmniCard. Decline reasons shown are typical for this programme, not gateway responses we logged on 256023.
Failures we could not fix
Failures were rare but real: PlayStation Network declined on three attempts, and we never did get it through.
What to change before you retry
- PlayStation Network: 0 of 20 cleared. Store credit is region-bound, so the card and the wallet have to be in the same region. Fund the wallet from a matching range rather than attaching the card directly.
- Nintendo eShop: 5 of 15 cleared. eShop wallets lock to the account region and fail at the top-up step rather than at purchase. Change the account region first, then attach the card.
Setup notes for OmniCard
- Set the billing address to exactly what OmniCard generates for India. Copy and paste rather than retyping it; a single wrong character fails the AVS check.
- Our risk rating for this issuer is on the high side. Keep balances low and do not park money on the card between charges.
- 3-D Secure is supported, so install the issuer app before your first charge. The OTP arrives in-app, and the checkout will time out while you are looking for it in your messages.
What the numbers add up to
The 3-D Secure behaviour is the reason we keep it. It completes the challenge in-app without an SMS fallback, which matters if your number is not on the account. The one thing we would change is the funding fee. Everything else about it is fine.
Questions we get about 256023
What does the 256023 BIN tell a merchant?
Roughly: who issued it, where, and what kind of product it is. Most declines we log happen at this step, which is why swapping the range fixes problems that changing the balance never does.
Is 256023 a real card number?
Six digits of a sixteen-digit number. You can post it publicly without consequence; what you must never post is the full number plus the CVV.
Why would 256023 be declined if the range is fine?
Of the 154 attempts behind this page, the losses broke down as address mismatch first, incomplete 3-D Secure second, and merchant-side range blocks a distant third. Only the last one is about 256023.
Can thousands of people share the same BIN?
Yes, and it is worth internalising. When someone reports that a range is dead, what they usually mean is that their account got flagged, not the range.
Test setup
256023 is a prefix-inferred range, so we did not run live charges on it. The table models how OmniCard ranges in this class generally clear, which is useful as a hint even though it is not a measured result.
Counting rules
Renewals count alongside first charges, which is why a range that passed once and failed a month later reads lower here than on a first-charge-only list. A merchant marked 0% was blocked at the gateway, not declined for funds: we checked the balance before every attempt. Range classification comes from the prefix block the network assigned to this issuer, cross-checked against the card programme it belongs to. Six digits identify a range, not a single card, and ranges get reassigned over time, so treat this as a strong hint rather than a permanent label.
Log through 01 Oct 2026 14:40 UTC · rate last re-checked 19 September 2026 · 154 charges on record for this range.