var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 8, 2009 10:00 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

...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.

Reply
13 replies
\"user-pic\"
Difdi
September 9, 2009 8:31 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: Well, not unless you've legally changed your name to See Id. Heheh.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ShruggingGalt
September 9, 2009 1:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: I think Visa has eased their photo ID rules where a merchant can request ID if they have reasonable suspicion that the person using the card isn't the person who owns the card. Signatures not matching is one suspicion.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
AuntieMaim
September 8, 2009 10:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: I'm always tempted to hold the \"See ID\" writing up next to the signature on the slip, scrutinize the two, then say, \"I'm sorry, this signature doesn't match. Do you have another way to pay?\" That bugs the crap out of me, for some reason. I've tried to copy people's signatures for various reasons, starting with forging get-out-of-class excuses in high school and ending with a boss who asked me to write and sign letters of recommendation for her. It's not easy.

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?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Kogenta
September 9, 2009 1:04 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AuntieMaim: Well, not quite, there are certain things that must happen in order for the store not to be on the hook. These include (but aren't limited to),
Proof that the card was there. This is done either through the swipe/pin chip of the card, or by taking an imprint of the credit card if it had to be keyed in manually.
Proof that the signature was checked to match the card. Generally the signature on the receipt is matched against the recovered card (assuming it is recovered) and has to match the disputed transaction receipt.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
webweazel
September 9, 2009 5:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pmcpa4
September 9, 2009 1:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Kogenta: For the ID Thing, please look at the back of your cards... 99% of them say \"Not valid unless signed\" \"See ID\" \"Ask for ID\" and \"\" are not signatures. Worn off signatures qualify as a void card. According to the merchant terms, If a card has anything OTHER then a signature, the merchant is to say, \"Sorry, I can Not Accept This Card.\"

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SayAhh
September 9, 2009 12:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AuntieMaim: I'm gonna legally change my name to \"See ID\" just so I can sign my card (and driver's license) that way. My second choice would be \"Ur A. Moron.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
AuntieMaim
September 8, 2009 10:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AuntieMaim: All that being said, I've gotten some pretty big tips (our business isn't one that really runs on tips -- we get maybe $0.50/hr in tips) added to credit card slips for checking ID on cards that say \"See ID\" -- one customer asked for the slip back and added $10 on a $12 transaction.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
katstermonster
September 9, 2009 1:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AuntieMaim: I tip better when I'm asked for ID (for the record, mine is signed AND says SEE ID. There's plenty of room!), and I make sure to thank the cashier at places that don't do tips.

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!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
corinthos
September 8, 2009 11:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pgh9fan1
September 8, 2009 10:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?:I used to work for the PA Liquor Control Board. Then and now they won't accept an unsigned credit card. They'll ask you for ID then ask you to sign the card. You should see people go apoplectic when they're told they must sign. \"But, but it says See ID.\" The cashier says it must be signed. Best part of it was when I had some guy go absolutely nuts when he was using the AMEX for the company he owned. He was buying gifts for clients. He knew he was screwed because in PA you can't buy alcohol anywhere else. Great times.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Shadowfire
September 8, 2009 10:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: Yea, except a lot of peoples' banks tell them to write SEE ID instead of signing. You tell them that you're right and their bank is wrong.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
September 9, 2009 3:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shadowfire: Consumerist taught me that I'm best off signing and writing \"SEE ID\" after it.

Cashiers frequently honor my request to see ID, too.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 5:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RandomZero
September 10, 2009 3:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
September 9, 2009 2:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: And yet most criminals are stupid. In my cashiering days, a \"see ID\" card turned me up a criminal who didn't have fake ID to go with it, handed over real ID that didn't match the card, and ended up with the cops called and I got a $50 reward for catching credit card fraud.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
f5alcon
September 9, 2009 8:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!):

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 2:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 12:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shadowfire:


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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnmc
September 8, 2009 10:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shadowfire: What banks are telling people such things? Is this an official stance or a teller's own personal advice?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
fjordtjie
September 8, 2009 10:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: way back before the days of consumerist, i was a cashier at a national craft store. never, ever, did they tell me anything about credit cards--none of this was ever discussed. there was no minimum, but there were a lot of unsigned cc's and some that said cid or see id. i noted once that the card specifically said do not accept without signature, and the person went APESHIT, i was reprimanded with a written warning by my employer, and i of course never tried to follow the cc rules again. so until the companies actually train their employees, and cardholders follow the terms of their own freaking card, this problem isn't going to be eliminated.

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 12:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fjordtjie:


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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
B9433
September 8, 2009 10:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I know that such fees can be annoying to consumers but that $2 chocolate milk described in the article may not be profitable or may even be losing the merchant money once processing fees are taken out which are often a % of the transaction and a flat fee.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
chrisexv6
September 9, 2009 2:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Brendon:
Funny, I was just thinking about this.

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?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 8, 2009 10:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
September 8, 2009 10:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: Outside of gas, I've never seen any product that's cheaper with cash.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
zacox
September 9, 2009 12:57 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: My pizza restaurant takes $1 off each coupon you use when you pay with cash.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 8, 2009 10:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dohtem
September 8, 2009 10:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: Isn't that also against the rules? Charging more for credit card purchases?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jmhart
September 9, 2009 1:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dohtem:

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
zacox
September 9, 2009 12:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dohtem: And i forgot to mention, its against the rules to charge more for a CC purchase, its not against the rules to charge less for cash purchases. And if youre advertising prices, you must advertise the CC price and offer a cash discount, or advertise both prices alongside each other.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 8, 2009 10:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Julia789
September 8, 2009 10:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I was at Disneyland recently with my son, and EVERY gift shop and restaurant in Disney asked for ID. Not wanting to fight with cashiers who don't know any better in front of my child (who was eager to get to the next ride) I let it go. But it was annoying.

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?

Reply
10 replies
\"user-pic\"
Taed
September 9, 2009 12:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 2:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
September 8, 2009 10:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Julia789: I have more of a problem with someone checking ID and then writing down information from it on the slip. A couple of times I've asked them to not write down any information on the slip, and quickly explained why. Nobody's ever not complied with my request.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
NikonGal
September 9, 2009 6:55 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@humphrmi:

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!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 2:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dohtem
September 8, 2009 10:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Julia789: At least you know that no one but you will ever use your credit cards at Disneyland.

For me, that alone trumps the inconvenience factor.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hills
September 8, 2009 10:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Julia789: This is the one rule I can't care less about - if someone else has my card, I want the cashiers asking for ID. I think it's a stupid rule, since it protects people committing credit card fraud.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
madog
September 9, 2009 12:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hillsrovey: Its harder to fake a signature well. I live in CA and we've got fancy drivers licenses with holograms and such, and when I see some out of state IDs they look like they were photocopied on a $75 home scanner.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Julia789
September 8, 2009 10:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hillsrovey: The minimum purchase requirement that stores frequently ignore the rule about - that bothers me more than the ID, personally.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 12:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
fuzzmanmatt
September 8, 2009 10:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Julia789: It's incredibly easy to take the information on the magnetic stripe on a card and overwrite it with information from another card. The equipment is cheap enough, the software is out there, and the willingness to do it once somebody realizes what can be done is amazing. I don't understand why people insist that an ID be shown. If someone hands me a credit card while I'm running a register, I take it, swipe it, hand it back, and have them sign my copy of the receipt. All done.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
catastrophegirl chooses not to fly
September 9, 2009 2:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fuzzmanmatt: selling tickets at walt disney world, the computer system for tickets show the encoded name and we were required to check it against the name on the physical card. it didn't work at the retail registers, but guest services and tickets caught a few stolen mag stripes that way while i was there.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Fett101
September 9, 2009 1:19 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fuzzmanmatt: You're assuming the criminals are smart or not lazy enough to do that. If someone steals a card from a purse they're going to go use it as quickly as possible before the owner reports it as stolen.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
veg-o-matic
September 8, 2009 10:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hillsrovey: Yeah, I've worked numerous retail type jobs and we were always instructed to check photo ID for credit cards - from the smallest neighborhood shops to a large national chain. I never knew it was against their agreement, and I get the feeling most customers didn't know either.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 8, 2009 10:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
The Black Bird
September 8, 2009 10:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I haven't had a merchant try the minimum purchase thing in quite some time but I'm going to carry it anyway.

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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
pot_roast
September 8, 2009 10:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I ran into this last night in Fallon, NV. I was rudely told to leave the store immediately.

Over a $0.99 \"convenience fee.\"

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
kenposan
September 9, 2009 1:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pot_roast: That's what you get for being in Fallon, Nv.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Crovie
September 8, 2009 10:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pot_roast: This is the part where you kindly let your card issuer know and then they send a mean letter to the rude store.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Scatter
September 8, 2009 11:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Crovie:

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Donathius
September 9, 2009 3:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Scatter: Hey, I was in New York at the end of June and paid a visit to the \"Hello Deli\" that is often shown on Letterman. I wanted to buy something, but I didn't have any cash, and ended up empty-handed. That's right, one of the most famous delis in New York is cash only.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
September 8, 2009 10:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Crovie: Then the store claims it's a \"cash discount,\" effectively changing nothing after you've wasted your time writing a letter.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 2:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
xenth
September 8, 2009 10:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Meh I'm sympathetic to the stores in this situation. Card companies screw them over but they'd lose a ton of business if they didn't accept the cards. Forcing the store to give a higher % of sales to card companies is just going to have me paying more in the end.

Reply
12 replies
\"user-pic\"
bagumpity
September 9, 2009 2:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xenth: It's not just the buffed up price to handle the transaction % that screws the merchants. You have to figure in time spent serving the customer. Labor is the single most expensive non-durable expense. The ten min a small business owner or his employee spends helping and/or monitoring me while I waffle about what brand of $0.50 chewing gum to buy is EXPENSIVE.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
September 9, 2009 3:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Youdidwhatnow?: I would have gladly gone somewhere else but this was the only store close enough to get to considering my time constraints. If I could have shopped anywhere else, believe me, I would have.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SacraBos
September 9, 2009 1:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xenth: I don't see why they would complain about the merchant fees and such. I mean, it's not like they have some kind of monopoly on credit cards... Oh wait...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Chris Walters
September 8, 2009 11:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xenth: My rule is if it's below $5 or so, I'll pay cash, simply because I think it's greedy of credit card companies to charge exorbitant (for that amount) flat fees + percentages. It's a trick to make the customer feel better about the credit card while passing all of the cost on to the merchant, while at the same time excluding the merchant from any real benefit.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ecwis
September 9, 2009 12:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters: It's important to note that certain companies have negotiated rates with the credit card companies (McDonalds is an example). I'm pretty sure that they still make profits from small CC purchases.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters:
I'll preface this by saying I'm not trying to be a jerk/troll, but why do you care about the merchant? I'm honestly curious. They don't care about you and how Visa/MC/Amex treats you on your end, why do you expend any energy worrying about how the CC companies treat them? Again, don't take this the wrong way, I'm truly curious.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Garbanzo
September 9, 2009 5:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: I disagree that small merchants don't care about their customers. I do agree that large national or multinational corporations don't--but a small mom and pop convenience store or other small neighborhood businesses mostly do.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Chris Walters
September 9, 2009 1:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: It's true, I have a possibly inappropriate empathy for small business owners--they seem more humanized to me than faceless corporations, something that's more a mixture of individuals (who I support) and businesses (who I'm indifferent toward). That's probably why I feel the way I do about this topic.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
witeowl
September 9, 2009 12:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: I'm not Chris Walters (obviously), but it might be worth nothing that those merchants are also consumers in this case and are somewhat at the mercy of credit card merchant providers. If the providers would create reasonable agreements (primarily by eliminating the per transaction fee and settling for just reasonable percentages across the board), then the merchants wouldn't feel the need to create minimum purchase limits or fees. (And if anyone thinks that stores have any sort of \"option\" about accepting plastic or not, they've clearly never run a small business.)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
xenth
September 9, 2009 12:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@witeowl: \"(And if anyone thinks that stores have any sort of \"option\" about accepting plastic or not, they've clearly never run a small business.)\"

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 10:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xenth:
The stores don't have to take CCs. If they choose to do so, they should abide by the rules. If they don't like the rules, stop taking CCs. If it's not profitable to take CCs, stop taking them. No one is holding a gun to their heads.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
henrygates
September 9, 2009 2:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: That's like saying they don't need to have a road leading to their store. Sure they won't get any business from anyone who drives a car, but some people still walk.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
JohnQPublic
September 9, 2009 1:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: \"If it's not profitable to take CCs, stop taking them.\" and be smacked with an Early Termination Fee of upwards of $1000 depending on their processor.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
p012382
September 8, 2009 11:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: what about the gas stations that have CASH: 2.45 and CREDIT: 2.50 how do you get out of that one?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 1:52 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@p012382:


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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
September 9, 2009 3:46 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: I've worked a number of retail jobs and never once was I trained on credit card rules outside of \"the signature on the card must match what is signed on the slip\" I always thought minimum purchases and ID requirements were simply store policies and had nothing to do with the cardholders. It was not until I found this site I realized about the merchant agreements.

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).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 5:40 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ShruggingGalt
September 9, 2009 1:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@p012382: If you read the rules, they've been relaxed....you're allowed to give a \"cash\" discount - you just can't give a discount for one major CC over another. i.e. if you give a 1% discount for using Discover, you have to offer it for Visa as well....

Reply
\"user-pic\"
geekgrrl77
September 8, 2009 10:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xenth: Yeah, I'm with you xenth. I'd have a hard time standing up to a struggling mom and pop store asking for a minimum purchase. Actually, I rent from a local video/dvd store (yes, not netflix) and I go out of my way to rent two movies when I don't have cash to make sure they make some money.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 8, 2009 10:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
stevejust
September 9, 2009 12:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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] ?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 1:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Garbanzo
September 9, 2009 5:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: It's a small percentage *plus* a flat fee which could be 30 cents. What would you think if a store raised its prices by 30 cents on every item to cover the fee just in case someone bought a single soda or candy bar with a credit card? See for example the \"pack of gum\" at [www.truecostofcredit.com] .

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
hills
September 8, 2009 10:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can you add that merchants can't charge a \"service fee\" for credit (gas stations, I'm talking to you!)?

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
September 8, 2009 10:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can't they just refuse to take your card, period, if stubborn people make a big enough deal of this? I doubt a lot of the big businesses really care about losing a $2 sale from an annoyingly argumentative customer.

On the flip side, I'd guess that the vast majority of places implementing this are smaller businesses who may already be hurting enough from merchant fees. So, do we support local businesses or nickle-and-dime them into oblivion? I'm very confused here, Consumerist...

Reply
8 replies
\"user-pic\"
ecwis
September 8, 2009 11:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: The merchants are contractually obligated to accept all valid credit cards (as long as they meet certain criteria). They can kick a person out of their store though...

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
witeowl
September 9, 2009 12:33 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ecwis: This sounds like a good time for a parable.

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?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
September 8, 2009 11:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: My mechanic doesn't take credit cards. I can choose another mechanic, if I want. But I trust this guy. So I pay him with cash or check. He is a well known and trusted auto mechanic in our neighborhood, and I doubt he's hurting for business.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@humphrmi:
If you've ever been to NYC, you know that your comment rings true there. Many of the very popular small restaurants and shops simply don't accept credit cards. One glaring example is Peter Lugar's Steakhouse in Brooklyn. Cash only and a dinner for two can easily hit $150. When I called for a Saturday reservation, I was informed that it's about 8 weeks out for a Sat. night.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 10:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal:
How about letting the business worry about the business. Trust me, they don't give a damn about you. Try asking the owner for a discount on milk because, you know, with the cost of rent, gas, etc. these days it's tough to buy milk. They'll laugh in your face.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
JPropaganda
September 8, 2009 10:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: What about bars that demand a $25 minimum on beers. Dicks.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
XTC46
September 9, 2009 12:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Julia789
September 8, 2009 11:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@JPropaganda: Yeah, if I stop by the pub on the way home from work, no way I'm drinking $25 minimum of beer! Maybe when I was in my 20's I could pound that out... but not in my 30's. At this age all I'd get for $25 worth of beer is a fat ass and a headache.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
mistaketv
September 8, 2009 10:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I had words with the lady at my local Blimpie over this. I was clearly irritated by the $6 minimum purchase when paying by credit card, and I told her it was against the merchant agreement. She told me her processor said it was okay as long as she posted a sign and was not apologetic in the slightest. She seemed irritated that I wouldn't just \"add chips or a cookie to get it over the minimum\" and STFU like all the other customers. I paid cash. And then had about 43 soda refills.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
idip
September 9, 2009 3:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mistaketv: I would have said, \"Oh, so sorry, no cash, I guess I won't take the sub.\" and i would let them toss it.

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!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ecwis
September 8, 2009 11:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mistaketv: Ha, this same problem happened to me and she also suggested \"add chips or a cookie.\" I didn't want chips or a cookie so the sub they already made likely went in the trash. I went across the street where my credit card was happily accepted.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
thezone
September 9, 2009 12:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ecwis: I'd go in everyday and order a sub ask to pay by credit card and walk out when they say no. You can also email Visa or MC directly. In fact why not take pictures of the sign and attach it to the email. MC will respond directly to you. I emailed them about 6 months ago with a question and they answered within 24 hours.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ecwis
September 9, 2009 3:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@thezone: I have done that but it was my first time going to that restaurant so I had no problem vowing to never go there again. I did file a complaint on the M/C website.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
KStrike155
September 8, 2009 10:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mistaketv: \"And then had about 43 soda refills.\"

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

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
PLATTWORX
September 8, 2009 10:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
ecwis
September 8, 2009 11:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PLATTWORX: This happens to me occasionally at Wal-Mart. I usually point out the fact that they're supposed to \"compare signatures\" as their computer tells them. Some poorly-trained cashiers think this means to compare the signatures of the ID to the signature on the slip/computer. Once I explain to them how that's wrong, they usually do it and don't require ID. One time, the cashier was stubborn and then I asked for a manager and they accepted the sale with no ID.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
September 8, 2009 10:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PLATTWORX: They're perfectly free to ask for ID. You don't have to give it to them, but I'm sure they can cry \"suspicious behavior\" and deny the purchase if you adamantly refuse

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MauriceCallidice
September 8, 2009 10:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: As I understand the merchant agreement (strictly a layman's skimming, I am not a lawyer or otherwise an expert) if they think the transaction isn't legitimate, they're obligated to contact the card issuer for verification. If they don't do that, they can't refuse the card.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
JPropaganda
September 8, 2009 10:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Printed. Laminated. Looks official. Awwww yea I'm ready.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
aswearengen
September 8, 2009 10:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
witeowl
September 9, 2009 12:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aswearengen: You would be correct that merchants wouldn't need to enforce a minimum charge, but only if that flat percentage were the case. Unfortunately, they are charged a transaction fee PLUS a percent. That hurts on small, low-profit items.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 10:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aswearengen:
There is (generally) both a percentage-of-sale fee and a flat-rate (usually ~$.25-.35) transaction fee. On the small sales, it's the transaction fee that really kills the profit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
GrenadeTestSubject
September 8, 2009 10:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aswearengen:

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.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
dwasifar
September 8, 2009 10:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I rankle at the ID requests, but the minimums don't affect me, because I would never use a credit card for a purchase under ten or twenty bucks anyway. I still feel like using a credit card for, say, a $5 McDonalds value meal means you don't have five bucks in your wallet and are living on the ragged edge of bankruptcy.

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

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
catastrophegirl chooses not to fly
September 9, 2009 3:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dwasifar: or don't usually remember to carry cash? i may have money in the bank and no green paper in my wallet at any given time.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ecwis
September 8, 2009 11:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dwasifar: Many people have cash back cards that give 2% back. It really adds up if you use it for all your purchases...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dwasifar
September 9, 2009 4:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ecwis: Cash back cards: I actually have one of those, and I do use it for all my credit purchases. It was responsible for overcoming a similar hangup I had about paying for groceries with a card. But I still can't bring myself to pay for really small purchases with a card.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dwasifar
September 9, 2009 4:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RStormgull: Debit card? Never. Too big a risk if the account is compromised. Someone steals your credit card number and charges up a bunch of stuff, you're left with an argument over whether you have to pay a bill. Someone does that with a debit card, and suddenly you're pleading with the bank to give you your money back. The legal protections aren't there.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 10:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is all fine and good until you encounter a jerk-off employee who won't be told what the rules are by some silly \"customer.\" I tried to object to a $20 minimum at an well-known DC establishment and was met with incredible resistance. The cashier informed me that I was not going to tell him what rules he had to follow and the situation quickly became very uncomfortable, given his size and anger. We simply walked out of the restaurant when it became clear he wasn't going to budge on the minimum (we were $3 below it).

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
sirwired
September 9, 2009 3:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: You do realize you committed theft, don't you? The no-min-purchase and no-ID rules are in a contract between the merchant and Visa/Mastercard, not between the merchant and you. While you can report the violation to Visa/MC for them to take action, or not, (Visa/MC's choice), walking out without paying could have caused the merchant to call the cops and have you quite rightly picked up and charged with theft.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
shadowkahn
September 9, 2009 8:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sirwired:

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ecwis
September 8, 2009 11:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Linkdead: The merchant still receives the money from fraudulent purchases if they follow the rules and compare the signatures instead of checking ID.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jeffjohnvol
September 9, 2009 2:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ecwis:


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

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
lehrdude
September 8, 2009 10:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
GrenadeTestSubject
September 8, 2009 10:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@lehrdude: Indeed, moreover they don't want to lose a sale and a customer.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Linkdead
September 8, 2009 10:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Merchant's impose all the risk of running fraudulent credit cards. It's in their best interest to check the ID of anyone trying to run a credit card purchase. Will it really kill you to show them your driver's license?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
The Black Bird
September 9, 2009 12:04 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Linkdead: It won't kill me but it sure as hell can contribute to identity theft.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Inglix_the_Mad
September 9, 2009 3:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Bogart's Falcon aka Philly Falcon:

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Black Bird
September 9, 2009 6:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Inglix_the_Mad: I honestly feel sorry for your friend and I am happy to hear it didn't put him out of business. Don't you think though, if it were really a well organized ring of thieves they would also have phony identification? What's the next step? Maybe have identification to prove the other identification is real?

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!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Inglix_the_Mad
September 10, 2009 4:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Bogart's Falcon aka Philly Falcon:

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Black Bird
September 10, 2009 8:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Inglix_the_Mad: Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure if your friend was a \"hot-head\" who would actually give me an argument or not.

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
HannahK
September 8, 2009 10:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

In a pinch, it's good to know I can use this information, but I don't see the point of going on a crusade over it. I would just feel incredibly awkward going back into the store after threatening to report them to Visa for not letting me put a pack of gum on my credit card. You really can't expect to remain a regular customer at a small store where the owner will remember you after pulling this card on them.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
frank64
September 9, 2009 1:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HannahK1012: Many people for some reason love the crusade of screwing the little merchant. Some think the use of credit is in the bill of rights or something.

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dp3
September 8, 2009 10:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd love to have one of these for the American Express cards, too!

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 10:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dp3:
IIRC, Amex doesn't have this rule. They do, however, have a rule that says that merchants can't discriminate against Amex cardholders. So that would prohibit a merchant from only charging Amex cardholders a fee or imposing a minimum upon them if they don't impose the same rule on all other CC users. It gets murky when the merchant DOES impose a limit on all cardholders, even though they aren't supposed to. Are they then in violation of their Amex agreement? It's hard to say.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
shepd
September 8, 2009 10:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ways the merchant can make a fool of you when you present this card:

\"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)

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
outlulz
September 9, 2009 4:48 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shepd: I actually know a store that gives a 3% discount if you pay in cash. Credit card purchases pay sticker price. I wonder if that's ok.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shepd:
While this may get you around the Visa/MC contracts, it *may* run afoul of some state's laws. Some states with more consumer-concerned legislatures have passed various pieces of legislation regulating things like this.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ShruggingGalt
September 9, 2009 1:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: Here's the link to Visa's current merchant guide:

[usa.visa.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Major-General
September 8, 2009 11:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
shepd
September 9, 2009 2:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Major-General:

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!

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
StanTheManDean
September 8, 2009 10:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
pmcpa4
September 9, 2009 5:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@StanTheManDean: Thank you StanTheManDean! You are 100% right, as a merchant, we never see these VS and MC rules, so how can they ever be enforced. Merchants agree to terms with the processors, not VS and MC. Consumerist, please get this right!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
JohnQPublic
September 9, 2009 1:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@StanTheManDean: Merchant Banks are the closest thing to the devil that I've ever personally encountered. They are literally out to screw you in every possible way. The evil imposed by these 3rd party vampires far outstrips the evil of the minimum purchase. Consumers that crusade against these small shops and their practices are helping themselves, yes, but they helping Visa/Mastercard/Merchant Bank more, who get to collect their own mini sales tax on nearly everything sold in the United States.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@StanTheManDean:
I believe (though I'm too lazy to provide a link/citation) the Visa website clearly states that the minimum purchase rules and the no surcharge for using credit rules apply to ALL merchants. While you're right that each merchant signs an individual agreement, Visa seems to have made clear that this condition is in ALL of the agreements.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
floraposte
September 8, 2009 11:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: There are also several states with laws against surcharges. Visa's got a list: [usa.visa.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@floraposte:
Excellent point; I was going to raise it in relation to the fellow who devised a clever handing charge scheme to get around the surcharge, but I got distracted.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
triscuitbiscuit
September 8, 2009 11:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@StanTheManDean:
Stanthemandean, you are incorrect on this point.
However Visa and Mastercard license their Visa'ness' and Mastercard'iness' to the banks, so it comes back to Visa and Mastercard in the end.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
StanTheManDean
September 8, 2009 11:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@triscuitbiscuit:


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

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
nuprinboy
September 8, 2009 11:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The bottom line is fraud and chargebacks really hurt merchants. One of the ways to prevent that is to ask for ID. The min purchase price is tough, even though it is against the agreement a mom and pop shop will def lose a lot of money processing cc on a small purchase, especially if they don't do a large volume on credit cards. They can pay up to 4+% percent based on your card. Reward cards etc cost more for the merchant and AMEX is very expensive. I am lucky to only charge larger amounts for my customers ($200 and up). Stanthemandean is correct that many merchant banks have their own guidelines also.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nuprinboy:
If mom and pop can't profitably take credit cards they should stop taking them, not simply implement their own rules and brush aside their agreements (to which cardholders are, arguably, third party beneficiaries).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
newfenoix
March 31, 2010 6:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Agreed. If they can't afford to do it right, they need to stop altogether.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
p012382
September 8, 2009 11:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

From learning this a couple months ago, i have gotten into several argument's about the minimum charge! After telling them what i have read on Conusmerist.com, Visa and MasterCard! I had one bar owner ask me why do you think i charge a minimum and i was like yes i do know why, so you don't have to pay a fee, owner said exactly. After that he backed down and he basically knew he couldn't win! It has happened to me several times since i pretty much rely on my debit card and rarely carry cash, the reason for that is if i used small amounts of cash and someone seals my wallet with one 20 in it, that's all they got! If they steal my wallet i could just call the bank and put a stop on my card, and well not really loose money at all, except for the few dollars that may be in my wallet!

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
RobertBaron
September 8, 2009 11:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I understand the merchant's problem with small margins on many items (ie bodegas and the like) but what it really comes down to for me at least, is that they can't have their cake and eat it too.

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.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RobertBaron:
I don't think I've been in a NYC bodega that actually took CCs and they seem to do OK (at least well enough to stay in business).

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
phisher4
September 8, 2009 11:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@phisher4:
To use a word of your's, that's simply paranoia. People waste so much time/energy worrying about ID theft and they carry it as far as to refuse to show an ID? Granted, I don't think you have to show it to them (I'm definitely not in the \"just show them, it's not hurting you\" camp), but to refuse to do so because you're afraid of ID theft is a bit over the top.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
nirvaeh
September 8, 2009 11:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Not really anything to do with minimums, but I wish Virgina would quit charging fees for using my credit card to pay my property tax. That's complete BS.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
September 8, 2009 11:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nirvaeh:
Gotta love the Govt. exception to the surcharge rule. Back when I used to drive, I hated the local court with a fury of 10,000 suns because I couldn't pay the tickets issued to me for *allegedly* exceeding the speed limit with my CC without paying their extortion surcharge.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
DanKelley98
September 9, 2009 12:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
StanTheManDean
September 9, 2009 12:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Difdi
September 9, 2009 10:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@StanTheManDean: If the merchant charges a fee for paying by cash, by check, by credit/debit card, or by gift card, then yes, they could charge a fee for credit cards. But if they omit one or more of the above from their fee, then they are prohibited from charging one for credit card payments.

5.9.2 and 5.6.3 don't apply to most ID checks however. Most transactions wouldn't require ID at all.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ctnchrisw
September 9, 2009 4:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@StanTheManDean: To me, regardless of payment used means it would need to apply to cash.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
someToast
September 9, 2009 10:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ctnchrisw: Exactly. I've never seen signs for \"minimum purchase $5.00\", only ones for \"minimum credit card purchase $5.00\".

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
StanTheManDean
September 9, 2009 12:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
rhys1882
September 9, 2009 1:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is one of those areas where \"the way things are supposed to be\" and \"reality\" do not meet. VISA/MC believe that all merchants are required to adhere to their terms because they require all of their members to require merchants to adhere to their terms. But the reality is that members or 3rd party processors do not necessarily actually impose those requirements on individual merchants. If a merchant violates VISA/MC's terms, VISA/MC has no recourse against them. VISA/MC only has recourse against the member or 3rd party processor. If they did not actually include those terms in the merchant's agreement, the merchant is not doing anything wrong. Additionally, the cold hard reality is that if someone uses your card fraudulently, it is the merchant who has to eat the loss. Are you really going to sit there and tell me that a merchant shouldn't check ID if someone is buying thousands of dollars in merchandise? Get your head out of the sand.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
barty
September 9, 2009 2:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: Problem is, there is usually a flat charge, around 15-30 cents, per transaction as well. So you go and buy a bottle of water for $1.03 and whip out the plastic because you didn't want to rummage through your change in the ash tray in the car. Now their gross revenue on the sale is already down to .75 cents. Tack on whatever overhead they have, plus their cost, and now their profit is probably just pennies.

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.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
SubzeroScientist
September 9, 2009 4:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I just dealt with this earlier today. I went to purchase a drink, pulled out my card, and the cashier informed me that 'we ask those paying with a credit card to either purchase a large or buy an additional snack'. And then started on a rant to her co-worker (while I was in earshot) about how they're a small business and thus exempt.

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

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
snehsneh
September 9, 2009 4:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

having a father that owns a few local gas stations around town I can tell you from first hand that when a person buys an item under 2 dollars on a card, we are gonna lose money on that deal. The credit card companies take 40 cents per transaction and 2%. So when we sale gas and it gets paid with credit cards we are always losing money. Most gas stations make 4 cents on a gallon of gas that is when its paid in cash. The id thing I personally do not mind showing mine. extra security.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Myotheralt
September 9, 2009 5:04 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

What I don't understand is why merchants that require an ID for the sale (alcohol or some such) do not accept a military ID card?

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

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
nstonep
September 9, 2009 8:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I agree from the business perspective. Independent owners may pay a per charge fee and a % of the sale, so if you're charging 2 bucks to your card they lose probably lose money on the sale.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
LordTobert
September 9, 2009 8:46 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I dunno if anyone here would know the answer to this question, but here we go. When I add money to my wallet on my PS3, there is a minimum amount of $5 allowed, would that fall under these rules?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
embean
September 9, 2009 11:34 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Are the rules the same in Canada? They seriously do this EVERYWHERE (charge minimum fee)

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
loudambiance
September 9, 2009 1:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The wife and I were at the beach and she had a severe allergic reaction. I ran to the store in the lobby of the hotel to get some benadryl, only to find out that they required a $10 minimum purchase (I had $4 of stuff in my hand). I quickly stated that they can't require a minimum purchase and the clerk replied \"I don't care.\" I ended up calling visa right there in front of him and he continued to refuse to sell accept my card. I grabbed the benadryl and walked out into the lobby to the front desk, explained the situation and told them to charge it to my room, and went back to my room. Even with knowledge of the Merchant Agreement, some stores will not change their attitude.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
BunnieGirlz
September 9, 2009 1:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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!

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Inglix_the_Mad
September 9, 2009 2:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Okay, I'm going to weigh in here. I ran a station while I was in college for a small corporation.

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.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
frank64
September 9, 2009 4:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Inglix_the_Mad: That is the good attidute to have. These guys are not worth having as customers and most people are reasonable and understand. So you don't really lose any sales, and certainly not profitable ones. I know they will say because you didn't sell them the soda on credit yesterday they didn't buy the $150 worth of liquor tomorrow. But really? It doesn't happen that much to make up for the many sales that would occur at a loss.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Inglix_the_Mad
September 10, 2009 4:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@frank64:

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
frank64
September 10, 2009 5:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Inglix_the_Mad: I guess I am more concerned with the tone of the people whom seem to love to throw the rule in the merchants face without any concern for them at all. This rule was put there after extensive lobbying by the CC industry and normally that is frowned upon here. So using the rule as the sole reason that merchants need to not have minimums to me is morally wrong. It really has to do with respect for other people in general. How can you complain about interest groups stacking the deck agains us when you one is being the instrument of enforcement of such a law?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
CentralServices
September 9, 2009 2:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

There's a simple way to avoid all this nonsense-carry cash and use it. You're only furthering the goals of the banksters by excessive use of debit cards for micro-transactions.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
September 9, 2009 2:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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!\"

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
wiggatron
September 9, 2009 3:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So many folks here seem quite adamant about clerks/cashiers/wait staff/etc asking for photo ID. I'd rather they not. I'm going to be the first to start writing \"DO NOT C ID\"

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
MSUHitman
September 10, 2009 7:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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!

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Marshfield
September 12, 2009 5:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

So is it OK for a company to say \"pay your bill by cash, check or money order. We also take Visa, MC or Amex but they carry a 2.5% fee\"? This happened to me just today at my daughter's college orientation in regards to tuition payments.

Reply
","");