<![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements - Consumerist Comments]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements - Consumerist Comments]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> If there is one thing I have learned it is that the rules only apply to the little guy (or girl). I run into things like this all the time in my travels like being told I have to have to have not only ID, but the receipts as well for my traveller's checks to cash one. It clearly states on the traveller's checks that matching signatures is all that is required for ID.

Also, at some stores like Walmart I have been told to present Identification when using debit on a card and correctly entering my pin number. This is not secure because the person at the checkout gets to get my address and social off my ID and/or the billing information for the card. Next all they have to do is look my name up in the phone book to get my telephone number.

Back to the post. Myself I kinda side with the merchant in some cases because they are in between a rock and a hard place. I would find it hard to make a demand that someone accept my credit card in a transaction that costs them regardless of what their merchant agreement says with the likes of Visa, MasterCard, or American Express.

samdonaldson

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I believe if the signature on the receipt matches the one on the back of the card, you're responsible for the charges. Thus not signing the card makes you more responsible when your card is stolen, not less. Have you read your terms and conditions carefully?

If your system was real, anytime a credit card company asked if a purchase was yours, you could just send them a fake signature and say it wasn't. At least by verifying against the back of the card there is some cross-check at the time of purchase.

brokenboy

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Only do this if your card is signed. I work retail, and if a card is signed, I never ask for ID, I just check the signature (which is how everyone should do it). If the card is NOT signed, though, and the customer refuses to show ID when I ask, I refuse to accept it because of the whole "not valid unless signed" disclosure on the card.

Uhhhh...WHAT!?! Explain to me exactly how having an arbitrary signature on the back of a card provides any proof that the holder of that card is that person. A responsible cashier will ALWAYS ask for ID regardless of the card being signed or not. This is for the CONSUMER'S protection.

By signing the back of the card you ensure that a thief who happens upon your card knows how to recreate (or at least simulate) your signature. All it takes is one numbskull cashier to accept the signature as the only required proof of identity and the entire credit limit is theirs! Why give them even a HINT of what your signature looks like?

I've not signed any of my cards in many years and always present my drivers license with the cards when using them. If somebody steals my card, fine, let 'em make up a signature when they make their purchases...all the easier to prove you didn't authorize the purchase when the bill comes.

If you're one of those folks who feel absolutely compelled to write something in the blank space on the back of your card, simply write "PLEASE CHECK ID".

FredTheCat

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> SecureLocation: All businesses can raise their prices any time they want. Actually, government-run businesses are singular in their lack of ability to do so.

houdini

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> "The more eggregious part of this post is that it involves a pre-programmed electronic kiosk - not a human."

I agree with you, totally, Eyebrows McGee - the kiosk has made a visit to a post office bearable. My (poorly made) point, was that somehow this electronic kiosk has been programmed with a minimum charge amount, as opposed to that handwritten "Minimum $5 Charge" sign we see elsewhere.

With the machine, you *can't* do what you are legally allowed, a human *won't* let you - I see the machine as the worse option.

SteveJeltzFan

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Holy crap... My College has been doing this forever.

They always have a minimum of a $5 purchase built into their credit card machines for some reason... Do you realize how much extra junk food I have to buy to get a cup o'noodle and a Mt. Dew cause I don't feel like taking $10 out of the ATM!?

Cactusjack_1999

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Bravo:

Only do this if your card is signed. I work retail, and if a card is signed, I never ask for ID, I just check the signature (which is how everyone should do it). If the card is NOT signed, though, and the customer refuses to show ID when I ask, I refuse to accept it because of the whole "not valid unless signed" disclosure on the card.

Also, as a side note, with Visa and Mastercard the signature can be for a different name than what is embossed on the front and it still must be accepted as long as the signature matches. It's a quick way to add a card user without having to add them to the actual account. Amex & Discover require the signature be the same name as what is embossed on the front, though.

Christopher

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Sorry Popken, you've made an ass of yourself once again. As many others have already said, this is only a violation if the minimum does not apply to other forms of payment. Why don't you give Visa a call and ask?

informer

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> "The more eggregious part of this post is that it involves a pre-programmed electronic kiosk - not a human."

Oh, man, I LOVE that kiosk. In and out of my busy, understaffed urban post office in under two minutes with a ridiculously easy interface that does EVERYTHING the dudes behind the counter can do. I do all my registered legal mail with Mr. Kiosk. He's much faster and I don't have to explain to him how registered mail works. I'm visiting Mr. Kiosk tomorrow to mail my overseas Christmas stuff.

Eyebrows McGee

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I agree with all who have said that this isn't a violation. Violations are when merchants say "$1 minimum on credit card purchases," not "$1 minimum on ANY purchase using this machine." Even if the machine only accepts credit cards, I don't think this falls under the merchant agreement.

punkrawka

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Visa cardholders are supposed to be able to use their card wherever the Visa logo is displayed, without minimums or surcharges. There are exceptions, though. For example, some states require Visa to allow a "convenience fee" for municipalities that accept credit card payments for property taxes.

I doubt Visa is in the habit of waiving their rules, even for major merchants. After all, if USPS can do it, so can Wal-Mart. And if Wal-Mart writes their own rules, then eventually everyone can. The system only works as long as cardholders know what that Visa logo in the window stands for.

It's possible that there is a statutory requirement for Visa to allow the Postal Service (a government-owned corporation) to set minimum charges. Or maybe the postal service is, in fact, breaking the rules. I'd be surprised if Visa is willingly letting them get away with it.

Complain to Visa. AskVisaUSA@visa.com.

Mike_

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I think 24fan24 has it exactly right... it's not a credit card limit, it's a minimum purchase in general.

InsaneNewman

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> He was lucky to find a machine that would sell him postage at any price. The machines at my NYC post office are often out of service for 4 or 5 days at a time. Can you imagine a "real" business allowing their equipment to stay broken for that long? And being able to raise their prices any damn time they want?

SecureLocation

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> What surprises me is not the tail wagging the dog (certainly Visa isn't going to cut off a huge client like USPS), but rather the fact that the USPS is picking and choosing rules as they see fit.

Speaking as a merchant, my impression is that the rules simply provide leverage for the banks to cut off troublesome or undesirable merchants, with as little recourse for them as possible.

timmus

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Drew writes:

"FYI, my understanding is that this is only a violation if the limit didn't exist on that machine using other paying methods. After all, I couldn't open a bag of candy corn at the store claiming I only wanted $0.02 worth of the candy charged to my Visa."

Ben Popken

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Huh, I saw that the other day too at the post office, but thought it was just the minimum purchase for the print out stamps (I really needed some 2 cent stamps, but the machine wouldn't make them for me).

MissPinkKate

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> This happens all the time. AT&T Wireless had a "Minimum" amount on their website to pay your cell phone bill with a credit card, back before they were bought out. My roommate reported them and the minimum was gone the next day.

Jory

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I just read through the visa agreement and apparently a merchant cannot make showing a government ID a term of acceptance of payment with a Visa card. Next time I'm at Best Buy when they ask me for ID I'll just say "nope."

bravo

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I always like to mention this link. which lets you turn in a merchant to Mastercard (I don't know if Visa has an equivalent). It's a very easy form to fill out. No need to explain your situation, just check the appropriate box for the kind of merchant violation (minimum purchase, maximum purchase, charging a fee, or requiring identification):

http://www.mastercard.com/contactus/contactus_mv.html

Spooty

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> it may just be that machine. i constantly use the USPS machine at my local post office to buy one 39 cent stamp and never get a minimum purchase thing.

ltflux

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I think if this minimum is applied to all orders this does not violate Visa's policy. Even if a credit card is the only method of payment, it would only be a violation if they allowed customers to purchase bellow the minimum amount by another means.

For example if a store accepted cash and credit cards, but required every customer to buy at least $1, this would not be a violation of Visa's policy because the minimum does not apply to amount that can be charged, it applies to the amount that can be purchased.

24fan24

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]>
I side with the USPS on this one. They are supposed to be a not-for-profit federal agency, so if they would rather not lose money on purchases under $1.00, that's fine with me.

Especially if it keeps overall postage rates lower. Dig around in your car and use the coin-op machine next time, Mike.

tonycontento

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> George, all purchases have to be done with a credit card, so technically it's both.

The Reviewer

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I am the fighter of the minimum purchase, first amy's ice cream and then USPS. What will I find next. There is actually a place that I really like that requires a min purchase of 5 dollars, but they are a tiny place, one small shop and very cool people so I have never pushed it with them. But USPS. Gotta do it.

The Reviewer

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Is this a minimum purchase for credit cards or all purchases?

georget99

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> I really get pissed when any establishment refuses my credit purchase because it's below there arbitrary minimum. It's embarrassing when you're in line with a $7 six-pack of beer (shaking with withdrawals) and the clerk says the minimum is $15 or whatever. This is the store's policy -- don't believe them if they say it's a bank policy or anything else. They don't like the fees and are trying to cut costs by refusing credit for small purchases. More than a few stores have lost my business with this policy. (I've never gotten angry, will just ask if they will allow it this time -- if not, have left without buying. And in either case have not returned.)

Hoss

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> That may be true, bravo, but I wonder how likely that is, given that the minimum is just $1. In mostinstances, companies have a $5 or $10 minimum. Now, it may be the case that $1 is the break-even point for USPS and they will not allow any transactions less than that via card.

The more eggregious part of this post is that it involves a pre-programmed electronic kiosk - not a human.

SteveJeltzFan

]]> <![CDATA[USPS Violates Credit Card Merchant Agreements]]> Just because that is the agreement that Visa requires most merchants to agree to doesn't mean they required the USPS to agree to that language. The USPS is pretty big, so they likely have some sway when it comes to negotiating their agreements with companies like Visa.

bravo

]]>