The few times I have read about a ring like the one(s) who scammed your friend it's been said they were very sophisticated and had realistic identification.

I recently read where Visa and the other cc companies were supposedly going to be cracking down on merchants. It obviously remains to be seen if they do.

Please don't misunderstand my position. I understand your friend has to do what he feels is right for him and his situation. The same thing applies to me

The pizza restaurant at the Seattle convention center had a $.50 charge for any credit/debit purchases. Luckily, I had cash on me.

Now I will carry these wallet-size agreements with me. Thanks!

@YouDidWhatNow?: Around here, places that have had a fake ID problem have been known to start verifying the ID electronically - if it doesn't swipe as valid, cops are quite often nearby.

Really, it's not even that. I did care about the lost sale, but I cared more for keeping my store above water because that affected MY paycheck, and coincidentally, my EMPLOYEE paychecks.

The truth is it's a feelgood clause for the cardholder. There's no way it's enforceable, otherwise Hertz and others would have had their contracts nuked over car rentals. You ever read the Visa Debit Merchant agreement? Despicable. Still if you wanted to keep running those cards you had to take the debit cards too.

Then again it's not the customer's fault the card issuers are such pricks. Then again, the customer blaming the merchant, whatever.

I've known merchants with minimum purchase amounts for plastic that have had them for years. You know what, not one of them has ever been revoked or penalized. I know I never was. I know my friend never has. This is despite the constant threats of illiterates that apparently don't understand that Visa/MC (et al) don't care as long as the transaction fees keep rolling in.

He wouldn't tell you to piss off literally. He'd simply say "Sorry, we don't accept charge cards without proof of identity."

Oh, and no, they usually don't have ID. Thieves are notoriously lazy cads. Thieves are also, typically, impatient and stupid. Never forget that and you will prevent 99% of all thieves in your life.

In any case, his requiring ID has led to a drop in credit card fraud at his store, to almost zero per year. As a bonus he get's a snicker every single time someone fumes and says they're going to file a grievance with the card company. He get's about one every six months, and has never had a single thing come of it.

Visa, MC, Amex, et al., can write anything they want into their merchant agreements. Whether it becomes profitable to enforce them is another.

If I'm ordering something for delivery, then they need my address. But buying and picking up an item in person doesn't require that information, since they have no need to know it to complete the transaction.

Likewise, if I'm buying alcohol, they are required by law to check ID, and therefore need to do so to complete the transaction. But a pack of gum or a newspaper or an Xbox are not ID-restricted items, and the transaction may be completed without showing ID. Therefore they are not entitled to refuse my card if I don't show any ID.

Gosh darn, MasterCard will allow a merchant to impose a fee or check an ID in VERY specific and limited circumstances, and forbids both in all other cases.

You fail.

wow, so he gave you a real ID with his real name and address on it, so that the police know who to find and where to find him.

Maybe. Kinda sounds like he offered to pay, and the restaurant refused the payment, demanding that he first order more food before they'd allow him to pay. If I agree to buy a cheeseburger from you, and after eating it I try to pay for it and you spring it on me that, oh, by the way, I have to order fries, a shake, and a lobster before you will accept my money, then you are SOL. Either take my money for the cheeseburger, and only the cheeseburger, or you don't get any money.

That said I want to add I will not allow something of mine, and that is not required by the credit card issuer, in someones else's hands (or computer system) where it could be used to help steal my identity...which could be ruinous to me.

If your friend refused to accept my charge that is his right (even though it's not allowed). I would not argue with him nor make any kind of scene. I would then file a complaint with the credit card issuing bank against him. If however he literately told me to "piss off", no matter how "polite" he would have an argument on his hands...big time!

I generally use cash for purchases under $10 at local small businesses because I know how they get reamed on the CC transaction costs. Also because there are some stores where my purchases are almost always small, so they aren't going to be able to make it up off me on a different day.

@Kogenta: "Proof that the card was there" The supermarket we go to asks to see the card after the swipe. They input the last 4 numbers into the register. It is proof that they actually viewed the card, and if the last 4 numbers don't match up the number what was swiped, it will usually mean the card has been "skimmed" with stolen credit card info, and can be caught immediately. Them actually looking at the card also prevents "skimmed" stolen info on a phone card, gift card, or such. This seems like a good way to go, at least to prevent skimming.

When I enter in any transaction I expect it to be mutually beneficial. I don't want to throw rules in someones face, telling him you have to accept my loss, you have to if you want to sell to the profitable guy. It seems to me to be morally wrong, and I find the people who expect aren't worth dealing with.

Keep going around starting fights and getting laughed at with your cards, you are spinning wheels and exposing yourself as the self righteous cads you are.

Don't ever plan to buy anything at my friend's stores. Employees that don't ask are disciplined then fired for repeat offenses.

One Christmas he had 17,000 in fake charges, which was near ruinous to his small business. After that debacle (it was an organized ring) he required it on all purchases. He will apologize to you, but flatly deny any sale on credit without identification. Don't look too closely at the Intellex DVR Cameras recordng the comings and goings around the store either. It's amazing, but a different ring skipped him 5 years later... I can't imagine why.

He almost went out of business that year due to Visa/MC pulling the money. He would tell you, politely, to piss off.

@ecwis:

I would have ordered a 3 dollar beer, paid the tab, and spilled the beer on the table before I left.

People, people, people... Can everyone please get over the "CC companies making it unprofitable for small bidness owners" or whatever? That is not true in all cases. At the very least, all cases where the small bidness owner isn't totally clueless.

ALL retailers build-in an extra markup on all their products to account for the CC fees, assuming ahead of time that you're going to be paying with a CC. When you pay with cash, they actually make a little more profit than they hoped for. The CC fees DO NOT hurt the business owner. They've already accounted for them.

...this is also why some stores offer a cash discount. See, they are publicly acknowledging that they built-in a CC fee upcharge to all their items, and are offering to take that upcharge off if you pay with cash. These retailers are simply more honest with their customers about their pricing. It's not so much a "cash discount" as it is "since you're not paying with a CC, we don't get the extra fee, so we won't pass it on to you."

Who pays for the CC fees? The merchant? Nope. You do - the consumer. In most cases, you're even paying a CC fee when you pay with cash - provided you're shopping someplace that doesn't give a cash discount. The merchant is harmed in no way, shape, or form by CC fees. They are passed right on to the consumer.

...and for fun, try asking a manager at a store that doesn't give cash discounts why they don't when other stores do. There's a really good chance that they're clueless anyway, but you'll get a song and dance about "but we offer the same *low* price to all our customers." Which is total BS. They just aren't offering to not charge cash customers the CC upcharge fee. Which actually goes to show that CCs *improve* margins for retailers when you pay with cash...you're paying more for that product than the retailer really wanted for it. So the retailer just pockets the extra 3% or so while whistling the tune of "same price for everybody!"

Self-righteous pricks: Piss off. You think that cute little piece of plastic is going to let you run my store. No. I don't care about the long, you've got no choice if you want to accept cards but Visa and Mastercard (and pretty much every card company, really) rarely enforce those provisions for a reason. Merchant revolt.

I literally told one sanctimonious prick to call the number and complain because nothing would happen. You hear that? Nothing. Nothing did happen incidentally, still had my Ruby Verifone humming along for 5$+ transactions.

This is kind of like the moron that tried to charge a .40 pack of gum to a card and didn't realize (and I ran the card just to f*ck with him) that it would never be approved. Less than a dollar, processors won't touch it. Yeah, sure, it's against the contract, but it'll never come back approved. You going to tell Visa/MC/Disc/AMEX to revoke their processor contract? I'll laugh my a$$ off if you think that'll ever happen.

"They build that into the prices."

The f*ck you can on most items junior. When you're in competition with chains that buy 100x what you buy in a month in one day, they're going to get a better deal than you. They can "build it in", most don't have the margin to.

Still, hand those cute little cards out. I'd just throw them away myself. Threaten to call the merchant. I'll act solemn in front of you, and then just laugh with the employees. I haven't seen one merchant in all the years I worked at / ran stations ever had their contract canceled over this.

@NikonGal:

...right, 'cuz that wouldn't look suspicious. Better to decline to provide your ID in the first place, citing the CC contract the merchant signed.

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!):

You can't fix stupid. Idiots are always going to get caught, one way or another. The fact of the matter is it's no big deal to a non-stupid crook to get a fake ID, so it proves nothing to have SEE ID on your card. Right under the bit where the CC company wrote "card not valid unless signed."

And think about a small business merchant in an area where trivial purchases are the norm. For instance, the owner of the little 5&dime next to my kid's high school. He makes most of his sales from school kids during the academic year. And even though most of those sales are very small, they still take a minimum amount of time. He could quite literally go broke if he did not enforce a minimum purchase credit card charge rule.

It's all about respect and treating the merchant like you would want to be treated if you were in his shoes. Don't be a ickweed-ay and whip out the plastic to buy a candy bar.

Don't own the store anymore, so I don't have the papers to copy from, sorry. However, I and other retailers in my area asked if this was okay and it was.

You'll have to check into it for yourself. Phone up your credit card issuer and ask them if stores are allowed to give you discounts for paying cash, rather than raising the prices for paying with a credit card.

Here's an example of a cash discounted store in my area, BTW. Knowing the razor thin margin on computer parts (rarely over 10%, normally 5%) it is understandable that the 2% demanded by the cheapest of merchant agreements will severely eat into profits.

Now, it wasn't *my* merchant agreement (being a Canadian), but here's a direct quote from the US one ShruggingGalt linked (emphasis mine):

Always treat Visa transactions like any other transaction; that is, you may not impose any surcharge on a Visa transaction. You may, however, offer a discount for cash transactions, provided that the offer is clearly disclosed to customers and the cash price is presented as a discount from the standard price charged for all other forms of payment.

I actually simply charged a surcharge for AMEX, since it was 5% (THREE TIMES the deal I eventually got from the others). I told complainers that I only accepted it because (rarely, once or twice a year) people would come in with only an AMEX and I didn't want to make them visit a bank, but I was completely willing to lose that business if they revoked my right to accept AMEX. The customers that brought AMEX were so used to it being flat out denied everywhere else that they were happy paying 5% to actually use it (normally because their dumbass company only gave them an AMEX to spend with).

I really wish the people publicly promoting that this is not allowed by contract would look into the agreements first, because they're only partly right. And pushing retailers like this will end up making them read the agreements and they'll do it "right": ie, your shopping will become more complicated. You'll need to subtract x% from all the prices, then add y% and z% taxes to them to come to the total. YAY!

Over the weekend I went to a small business to get some catered food. I more than covered their minimum, but Ive always wondered: when using debit I usually get a receipt to sign (is it coming across as Visa? dunno).

On that receipt is a place for a tip. Has anyone thought of giving them a tip for roughly the amount the transaction costs them?

I dont feel bad not doing so when the transaction is pretty hefty (like catered food) but going somewhere quick like a mom and pop donut shop or pizza place, why not give them the $$$ back as a tip to cover their transaction fees?

I always seemed to just make the minimum purchase requirements at most places I go, so I never had a problem... until last year when I went into a local store in my town. They sell fun costume jewelry and I usually bought my sister's and friends Christmas, birthday, etc. presents there because they have such cool and unique stuff. I also bought quite a bit for myself, including all the jewelry for my bridesmaids for my wedding. They knew me there because I would always stop in when I walked into town, and I would spend probably close to $100 each time I made a purchase.

So one day I'm with my sister and she likes this cute little necklace that's on sale for $8. They greeted me as usual, asked how I was, and we browsed for a little bit. I didn't see anything else that I wanted so I went to the register and handed over my credit card. The woman behind the register (the owner) looks at my card and looks at me and goes "Oh no, I can't take a credit card for this." Besides the fact that it's a violation of the merchant agreement, there are no signs saying a minimum purchase is required for a credit card. She hands me back the card and looks at me and I said "well I don't have any cash."

Then she says "Well is there anything else you want to buy?" I was so annoyed, and I wish I had argued, but I just said "I guess not!" and walked out. I felt bad because I had wanted to get something for my sister, but I wasn't about to go to an ATM and go back into the store with cash because this woman didn't know how to treat a loyal customer. Needless to say I have never gone back into the store, I even wave sometimes when I walk by, but I never got over that. What a terrible, petty way to lose a good customer!

Also, I hate when corporations take advantage of or exploit the smaller guy. Small businesses are at a disadvantage when it comes to setting CC policy and the CCCs know it, so they exploit that power arrangement to drain profits in the name of convenience.

And actually--re. the adversarial relationship--in small towns or smaller neighborhoods within bigger cities, the small business merchants are neighbors, friends, in-laws, etc. They often do treat their customers in a less adversarial way. I obviously have no stats to back this up and I'm not trying to go all Rockwell on small town America--I just think in small-scale situations there are more human-to-human connections made naturally.

Get some masking tape and put a piece of the tape over the license number and the address (not your name). All they need to see is your name and picture anyway. And if they can't see it, they can't write it down!

@dragonfire81:

I'm sorry to hear that, but that's your employer's fault.

As for the 2nd issue...that's the store's fault, and feel free to point out the error of their ways to them. I get your point about being rushed...but I might have just left without buying anything.

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!):

As noted, it makes little sense to do such a thing. Anyone brazen enough to steal and use your CC in public is more than capable of coming up with a fake ID. And when they do so, all of a sudden they are even more "you" than they were before. "SEE ID" does nothing to protect you.

A different state's drivers license would be easier to forge, as there is only one format for military IDs.

When I was a young adult and first learning to use credit, cards weren't ubiquitous. No one charged meals at McDonalds because that wasn't an option, and putting a really small purchase on a card really was because you were broke until payday. It just Wasn't Done. Like I said, I know that now those barriers are gone, but I still don't feel comfortable paying for a sub-$10 item with a card when I have the cash on me. And I always have the cash on me; that's the other side of it. I would never walk around without at least some cash.

Plus which, if you read the other articles here, cash is sometimes a good idea. There are some places you don't want the credit scoring agencies to know you're shopping.

The funny part is, the store was a national chain. It's quite tempting to phone them in, just to see what happens.

I ran into a situation tonight where I called a local store and asked flat out if I needed an ID to pay with a credit card there (since I had my card on me but not ID). I was told I did. Now I would have made an issue of it, but only had a 30 minute work break to swing by there and get what I needed (ended up paying cash).

Cashiers frequently honor my request to see ID, too.

Last month, I filed a complaint with Lowe's corporate (and Visa) over requiring ID. The manager of the store was VERY apologetic and promised that his employees would never do it again and that they were in the wrong. The complaints are very effective.

If they are displaying the MC/Visa logos on their doors, they should accept the card. Not... oh we accept it... oh you're only spending that much, you have to spend more.... BS!

@supercereal:

A cash discount is posted in the store before you make a purchase. Also, it's a mark-down from price tags as they exist - not a mark-up on everything you pay for with a CC. Otherwise, they're making up BS on the fly.

@Taed:

...well, we don't know whether they "required" it or not, since she just handed her ID over. Which is her choice and we don't get to bitch to her about it...but the fact is we don't know.

So no, I don't have a particular problem with businesses doing this. Keep a few bucks in your wallet all the time and this shouldn't be a problem.

@p012382:

...it's called a cash discount, and is perfectly fine. There's nothing to get out of there.

@stevejust:

CC processing fees are generally 5% or less. I think usually around 3%. So, generally, if a vendor wants to sell an item at $1.00, they bump it up to $1.03 to account for the CC fee.

I think it is OK that the guy wants to make a profit when I buy something. Fair is fair.

[usa.visa.com]

Though sometimes I regret having that on there when I'm buying a 2 dollar coffee and am in a rush and am struggling to find my ID. Sigh. The price I must pay!

As for if the machine says approved, that 10000% does not mean the merchant is getting paid. Just means the funds were there, and will be transferred at the end of the day, and for any reason, the customer can pull them back by initiating a charge back.

But since Visa will throw back the charge as fraudulent 100% based on the customer's signed statement that "signature isn't mine"...well, I can understand the POV of a merchant wanting to see ID.

But I know where you're coming from.

Here's from the latest Visa guidelines: although Visa rules do not preclude merchants from asking for cardholder ID, merchants cannot make an ID a condition of acceptance . Therefore, merchants cannot refuse to complete a purchase transaction because a cardholder refuses to provide ID . Visa believes merchants should not ask for ID as part of their regular card acceptance procedures .

I note that Visa's rules state that "see ID" on the signature line makes it an unsigned card, and thereby invalid BTW.

Nope, perfectly fine. That is part of the merchant agreement: Minimums and fees for using CCs are prohibited, but cash discounts are specifically alllowed. It seems like semantics, but it's really not.

Greene's Liquor here in Atlanta is famous for their cash discount. All liquor has about a 1.5% cash discount. No problem what so ever.

Of course if a card is suspected as being fake or stolen and it's called in and approved by the issuer and the above requirements are met, the business is basically bulletproof on that transaction even if it turns out to be fraud later.

And yes, I can see why a merchant selling a $1.50 bottle of soda would not want to accept plastic for it: not only is there a percentage of it taken (usually around 2%), but the first 25-40 cents are also taken. So, 25% of that soda goes away, leaving zero profit for the merchant.

So true. It's accept plastic or fail. I'm a penny pincher. I'm the type to use the right credit card to maximize my cash back. However, I hate to see businesses I like struggling and know it can be that 1% that makes it or breaks it. I'm not talking about the best buys of the world, but the sweet sandwich shop around the corner.

Mr. Chant has a job that pays the bills. Barely. His job is sixty miles from his home because it's the only job available (hard times, you know). He drives to work every day because public transportation is unavailable and walking is obviously not an option. He needs to fill his tank, of course, but it costs five dollars per gallon in his city because, well, because this is my story. Mr. Chant has a hard time putting enough gas in his car while paying his bills. And, yet, Mr. Chant needs to keep his job.

Should Mr. Chant really just sell his car?

Can we have any empathy for Mr. Chant's predicament?

@JPropaganda: most bars have a minimum for running a tab, not for using a card. It just so happens that you need to use a card to run a tab, but thats becides the point. hehe

@Julia789: This has been covered on Consumerist before. It is NOT against their merchange agreement to ASK for ID, only to REQUIRE it. So, since you said Disney ASKED, there does not seem to be a problem.

Class TWO Faced MasterCard rules:

5.9.2 public publication.

" A Merchant is permitted to charge a fee (such as a bona fide commission, postage, expedited service or
convenience fees, and the like) if the fee is imposed on all like transactions regardless of the form of payment used, or as the Corporation has expressly
permitted in writing."

Whoops. MasterCard allows merchants to charge fees, specifically convenience fees.

Actually MasterCard will allow a fee IF the Corporation (MasterCard) approves the fee. Whatever lame brain idea the merchant has, the Corporation might approve. Most of the convenience fees approves are going to be issues of discounts not allowed. For example paying your parking ticket. If the ticketed price is $10 and the laws do not allow the city to give a cash discount, accepting CC could be construed as a giving a discount.

Lame Brain BS. And the Corporation is going to approve the crap. How many fees are approved versus how many are just snuck in by the merchant is a whole different issue.

5.6.3 public publication.

A Merchant may require additional identification from the Cardholder if the information is required to complete the Transaction, such as for shipping purposes.

" additional indentication from the Cardholder if the information is required to complete the transaction"

The such as for shipping purposes is an example of reasons the Corporation accepts. Any reason could be considered valid if the Corporation (MasterCard) approves the reason. Needing to check the color of her hair on her DL could be a valid reason if the Corporation agrees.

There is a note in a merchant security document regarding merchant responsibility with regards to fraudulent transaction. Using that note a merchant, who has been classed as an at risk merchant or is in a business class with a high rate of fradulent transaction, could apply to the Corporation to require ID as a condition of all sales.

Remember, the agreement is between the merchant and the Merchant Bank. If the Merchant Bank agrees with the merchant, the MB is going to get Corporation (MC) approval

Wanna bet I can find an allowance for a minimum transaction amount if I did deep enough?

Actually I did find a merchant bank agreement that stated they would void all merchant transactions below $1. As I read the statement, the MB would decline to process the <$1 transaction. The customer gets it free, and the merchant eats the loss.

Don't beat up the lowly merchant. Go after the EVIL merchant banks and CC companies.

A Merchant is permitted to charge a fee (such as a bona fide commission, postage, expedited service or
convenience fees, and the like) if the fee is imposed on all like transactions regardless of the form of payment used, or as the Corporation has expressly
permitted in writing.

Whoops. MasterCard allows Merchants to charge fees, specifically convenience fees.

5.9.2 public publication.

A Merchant may require additional identification from the Cardholder if the information is required to complete the Transaction, such as for shipping purposes.

5.6.3 public publication.

" additional indentication from the Cardholder if the information is required to complete the transaction"

The such as for shipping purposes is an example of reasons the Corporation accepts. Any reason could be considered valid if the Corporation (MasterCard) approves the reason.

" if the fee is imposed on all like transactions regardless of the form of payment used, or as the Corporation has expressly permitted in writing"

Gosh darn, MasterCard will permit a merchant to impose a fee.

Don't beat up the lowly merchant. Go after the EVIL merchant banks and CC companies.

@Julia789:

"Does anyone know WHY credit card agreements prohibit the merchant asking for ID? I don't understand why, although I've always known they were not supposed to."

...I take it you missed all the Bob Dole anti-personal-check commercials several years ago? The point is that the CC is supposed to be more convenient for the consumer to use, and one of the big points they make about that is not having to give ID for your purchase. If you have to go through as much effort to use the CC as to write a check, it's no longer that much more convenient.

There may be other reasons, but I'm guessing that's the big one.

@Shadowfire:

...having a copy of the cardmember agreement handy would do that.

@fjordtjie:

...no, sadly, I'm pretty sure vast numbers of us are incompetant.

@YouDidWhatNow?: yay so everyone loses??? So places that sell candy bars have to raise them to $5 to cover the CC processing fees?

I dunno. I went through a phase when I first started reading consumerist when I was getting pissed about being asked to show ID. But then I was fradulently charged over a grand on one of my cards, maybe due to a card skimmer, and I've decided those merchant agreements help the Credit Card companies more than they do the consumer.

I don't mind showing my ID anymore. Or minimum charges. I do mind how much cc companies are taking in transaction fees.

Remember [www.truecostofcredit.com] ?

I used to show my drivers license when asked up until several years ago. One day I went into a Lowes to return something I had purchased. I originally paid for the item with a credit card and I remember showing the cashier my drivers license. I asked that the refund be credited back to the same card it had been charged on (the charge was made the day before).

The cashier at the returns section asked to see my drivers license which I felt was strange but I obliged her and gave it to her. The cashier started entering something into the computer. She only got about the first 2 or 3 key presses in when I grabbed my license back from where it sat on the register.

I asked if my license information was being put into their computer. The answer was yes. I refused to allow that information to be entered and asked for the manager. When the manager came over he was belligerent from the start. He tried to tell me it was required to process the refund. I asked why but he couldn't come up with an answer. He told me he would not credit my return back to the card without the license.

I requested from the cashier the telephone number to their customer service department which she gave to me. I called the number right there and spoke to someone who told me Lowes had no such requirement. The CSR asked me if I would mind handing the phone to the manager, which I did. The CSR must have asked the manager for his name because I heard him say the name that was on his tag.

After about a minute or so my phone was given back to me by this asswipe manager who then told the cashier to process the refund without my license. There was no apology of any kind from him. After he left the cashier apologized to me and told me that the manager who gave me a hard time had just recently been put into that position and had instituted the license rule along with a number of others. She went on to tell me his so-called rules caused a lot of customers to get pissed (my word not hers) off.

A few months later I happened upon the same cashier in a checkout line. She didn't remember me until I described the incident. She then remembered and told me that less than a week after the problem the manager who I had the problem with had been terminated. I feel he got what he deserved.

As handy as that might be, often you're presenting it to a low-level employee who is only following policy; and even if there's a manager around, he or she might not have power to approve.

@triscuitbiscuit:

Try explaining that to the Merchant Bank when they cancel your arse for violating "their" Rules.

If they are so hurt by the merchant fees, they can terminate their merchant agreement. People will still go to the store if it's better than the competition.

What about the idea -- in this era of personal information paranoia -- that my giving an ID to a cashier may compromise my identity? By showing my ID for a trivial purchase, the cashier theoretically has my driver's license number, name, address, and phone number (assuming he has a good enough memory to remember it or if he jots the information down soon after checking it).

Isn't it usually a bad idea to allow more and more people to check your ID when not necesary?

Regardless of the stolen identity argument, at the very least, NOT checking ID would prevent stalking from the sketchy cashier with the hot woman who's has to present her license to buy a Snapple.

This is one issue I side with mom & pop stores on. I'd rather do without the convenience of plastic on low-level purchases and keep the transaction 100% between me and the merchant--only because I don't think the credit card companies are playing fair.

I think this issue also comes down to Visa and MC as well. If they're not going to enforce their merchant agreements and we're not going to choose cash instead, then there's really nothing to motivate merchants into adhering to their merchant agreement.

@AuntieMaim: Had that happen several times. Once at Sears I worked in hardware and after I sold a guy 5 tool boxes for christmas presents he put See ID on his card and I asked for it and he either acted if he couldn't find it or really couldn't. I informed him sorry couldn't complete the transaction and offered to hold it for him while he found it. He just happened to find it then and asked me to help him load some tools out to his car with him. I went outside and he told me no one ever asks that and was glad I risk my commission on the sale by requiring him to show it. He gave me 50 dollars which I could have got fired for taking but we didn't have cameras in the parking lot.

I do hate when people have that though. I signed all mine Winnie the Poo one year and only one lady ever caught it the whole time I had it. She laughed and told me I better sign it the same way which I did.

I think that you know damn well that any store nowadays that doesn't accept credit cards won't survive for long so stop pretending as if they have a choice.

Certain business can buck the trend and still have trouble fulfilling the demand for their product/services. Others, well, they bite the bullet and play by the "normal" rules.

@shepd: Please to be quoting chapter and verse then.

@Linkdead: Yes, it will.

If a business, even a small one, does something to differentiate themselves from other businesses, then yes... they can write their own rules and survive, even flourish. But, I hate to say it, selling chocolate milk chugs and Hershey bars and chewing gum isn't going to differentiate any business, local or national.

That merchant agreement is NOT the merchant agreement signed by the merchant.

The merchant signs a merchant agreement with a merchant bank (CC clearing house). Each Merchant Bank is allowed to set their own rules independant of the rules setforth by the CC companies.

This means the merchant may actually be allowed/required to have a minimum purchase amount, may be allowed to charge a processing charge for CC transactions, may even be required to view ID as part of the merchant agreement.

The CC companies and Merchant Banks are the EVIL parties in this discussion.

As a pro-consumer blog, The Consumerist should be supporting the consumer. The merchants are consumers of the Merchant Banks. Don't blame the merchant, blame the EVIL Merchant Bank that screws over the Merchant every chance they get.

PS: Yes, I have a clue what I am talking about. My merchant bank sent in a secret shopper to check my store. My CC fees were increased by a small % because I failed to check ID on all instore transaction PER THE TERMS OF MERCHANT AGREEMENT.

Visa/MasterCard talk a good talk, but the Merchant Banks "merchant agreement" is the boss.

A business transaction is by nature adversarial. The buyer wants the maximum benefit (usually lowest price, best terms) and the seller wants the maximum benefit (highest price, best terms). As a buyer, why do you give a second thought to whether a particular transaction is good for the seller? If it's not a good transaction (in some way), they won't engage in it.

Being asked for ID bugs too. As far as I know, if the purchase is approved by the little merchant services phone-for-approval swiper box, the credit card company is on the line to pay it, regardless of whether it turns out to be fraudulent. Maybe I'm wrong about that? But if that's the case, then why does the company making the sale feel the need to double-check -- isn't that why they pay high fees to the merchant services credit card processor?

At my work, processing a credit card over the phone requires the billing zip code and the three-digit security code, just like an internet transaction -- we can override that feature, but the transaction then isn't guaranteed (if it turns out to be fraudulent, it won't be paid) and costs twice as much to approve. I feel badly asking for it, because the customers get weirded out giving it, but got in trouble for the massive transaction fees when I and another manager decided to stop making people give it for about a month (until the merchant services bill came and the owners found out what was going on). On the other hand, though, people give out those numbers in internet transactions all day long, and it's another way to make sure the charge isn't fraudulent, so why freak out about giving it?

"PRICES DISPLAYED ARE CASH DISCOUNTED BY 5%"

"A $5 HANDLING FEE IS APPLIED TO ALL PURCHASES UNDER $5. A DISCOUNT OF $5 IS FURTHER APPLIED FOR USING CASH FOR PURCHASES UNDER $5"

You lose. They win. The agreement is satisfied. You will waste someone's time calling in. Have fun!

(I *am* right on these, I know what the agreements state)

The charge usually includes both a flat fee (say $.25 or $.35) plus a percentage, such as 2% or 3%. So on small items with a low margin it can make things difficult, especially when 90% of your customers use credit.

I do think they are checking ID to protect themselves, not to protect me. They could probably give two hoots about me if I'm not already their customer. (Presuming my card is stolen and someone else is at Disney with it!) It does give some people a feeling of security to see ID asked for, I suppose. But fake IDs are easy to make, or if they have my credit card it probably means they took my whole wallet, and have my ID anyway.

Other than a slight annoyance or inconvenience, it really doesn't bother me much personally, to be asked for ID. It was funny though, as I was giving ID at Disney I was thinking, "Boy, a lot of Consumerist readers would be giving me a hard time for giving up my ID so easily!" But with my kid tugging at my arm and a line of children waiting behind us, I didn't want to make a big deal about it. Not the time or place.

I suppose the part of asking for ID that does bother me is simply the fact that the merchant is going against their agreement - because if they are going against their agreement on that, what else are they doing/not doing according to rule? Are they messing around with the "minimum purchase" rule? Are they going to follow their returns agreement with me, if they won't even follow their own merchant agreement? I suppose it raises questions.

Does anyone know WHY credit card agreements prohibit the merchant asking for ID? I don't understand why, although I've always known they were not supposed to.

Which cost them maybe 43 cents. The markup on soda is obscene.

A lot of stores just post a minimum CC charge to discourage people from charging small amounts, but will always let the charge go through so they do not violate their merchant agreement.

I know, I know, it's not really that way any more, but old habits die hard.

I thought the fees were just a flat rate. So, like 1% is taken out regardless of the amount of the purchase. If that is the case, I don't see why the merchants would need to enforce a minimum charge.

Nobody ever complained, but I've had alot of people specifically thank me for doing so. More than a few of them would go on (bitterly) about how other people "never bother to check, etc.."

As long as it's nothing more than a quick glance at my picture and name, I personally don't mind it.

@geekgrrl77:

Note my posts above. No need to worry for the merchant. Unless they're totally clueless, they've already factored CC charges into their pricing.

you're relying on the false premise that everyone involved is competent.

@hillsrovey:

...because clearly, someone brazen enough to be presenting a stolen CC in public couldn't possibly be able to come up with a fake ID. Which then even "proves" they are you even more, making it even harder for you to dispute the charge later.

@supercereal:

Some stores do it. Around here, a HUGE home improvement/farm/outdoor products/clothing/whatever store is Fleet Farm. In other states, the same thing is Farm & Fleet. They provide a cash discount across the board.

I was stunned that Wal-Mart asked for ID last and my cards are always signed. Do Visa and MasterCard not enforce the agreements???

One would think when merchants that big do things they should not, an employee of either organization would get it done to them and report it.

@dohtem:

Yes and no. You can't just put an upcharge on your products because someone presents a CC. But you can "build in" a few extra % to your pricetags across the board, assuming people will pay with a CC. Then, it's perfectly fine to provide a discount to cash customers.

For me, that alone trumps the inconvenience factor.

Over a $0.99 "convenience fee."

The problem is if the store still want to enforce their minimum purchase rule showing them the card isn't going to necessarily make them change, even for your charge.

From their point of view, I can understand that they've probably been deceived by tourists with fake credit cards thousands of times over the years. But still, it's against their merchant agreement.

Is everyone's merchant agreement the same, or does perhaps Disney have a separate special merchant agreement that their attorneys have negotiated?

@Brendon:

All retailers (at least, all retailers with a clue) build in the extra % they lose to CC into their pricing. It's already been accounted for.

Hence, why you see some stores offering a discount for cash purchases.

...have them add on the fact that it violates their contract to require to see a picture ID with the CC. And that it's also against the contract to accept a card that hasn't been signed - including cards that say "SEE ID" on them.