Can I see your ID not your signature? (credit card merchants)

[DeltaMac]

I understand it completely. Some retailers require you to go through training and this training that I remember was straight from Visa.

You're being oversensitive to a non-issue.

I'm thinking that arogge may not live in the United States. Other countries will certainly have other procedures on credit cards vs. ID verification.
His opinion might be fully justified in other jurisdictions

I expect that the plastic credit card will fall out of fashion fairly quickly as cell phones get more sensing devices built-in, or the plastic cards include those sensing devices.
And, then the photo ID will be redundant, too.

 

[MacNut]

You don't seem to have understood the merchant agreement. It is not 100% acceptable to demand a photo ID when a signed card is presented. A government requirement to demand a photo ID for certain purchases is not related to the credit card transaction itself.

Do you have links to back up the fact that it is illegal to ask for ID? When I worked retail I always asked, and most customers were glad too.

 

[Nermal]

I'm thinking that arogge may not live in the United States. Other countries will certainly have other procedures on credit cards vs. ID verification.

I've never been asked in NZ; my card requires that I enter a PIN in most cases so that's sufficient evidence that the card is mine. In the US, on the other hand, I was never asked for a PIN and in some cases was asked to show ID. The cards must be processed differently over there otherwise I'd certainly have needed a PIN there too.

 

[b3av3r]

I kind of understand where you are coming from in that asking for photo ID may be a violation of some sort (taking your word for it) but at the same time it is a non-issue for most people.

You do realize that probably 95% of cashiers have no idea there is any kind of agreement between their store and each credit card company let alone what the rules for each agreement are. They just know what cards they accept and what cards they don't accept.

On the same line with cashier training, do you think a part-time 18 year old cashier can more readily spot the differences between two signatures or between two typed names? If the cashier barely spends enough time looking at the ID to match two names, how much time do you think they will spend comparing signatures? Name on credit card: John Smith, name on ID: Ricky Bobby. Nope not selling it to you. Signature on card: squiggly line, signature on receipt: squiggly line. Have a good day with your new TV.

I have never signed the back of any of my credit cards. Nor has a cashier ever asked to see the signature. I have much more faith in cashiers learning to compare two names and a picture than two signatures.

 

[rhett7660]

I show them my ID. Pretty simple. All they're doing is verifying that I am the card holder and protecting themselves from potential fraud.

Not to mention protecting the user of THAT card. I have no problem with them asking for ID. In fact I usually have my ID out ready to show them. I also go a step further and instead of signing the credit card, I have on the back "CHECK ID" instead. I have yet to come across a merchant who refuses to take my card with this on the back. And if they do, then I don't shop there. Pretty simple to me really. Protect myself against possible fraud by showing my ID. Yes please.

 

[yg17]

Do you have links to back up the fact that it is illegal to ask for ID? When I worked retail I always asked, and most customers were glad too.

It's not illegal to ask for ID. It is against the merchant agreement between the merchant and Visa/MC/etc to ask for ID, but I'm not sure how well it's enforced.

I show my ID if asked. I don't get what the big deal is. You're just holding up the line for everyone else when you throw a tantrum over being asked to show ID.

----------

I'm thinking that arogge may not live in the United States. Other countries will certainly have other procedures on credit cards vs. ID verification.

If he lives outside of the US, he'd likely have a chip and pin credit card where he has to use a PIN to prove it's his.

The US is behind on that.

 

[rhett7660]

..snip..

Maybe you should just carry cash and use that. No hassle what so ever.

 

[snberk103]

I'm thinking that arogge may not live in the United States. Other countries will certainly have other procedures on credit cards vs. ID verification.....

....
If he lives outside of the US, he'd likely have a chip and pin credit card where he has to use a PIN to prove it's his.

The US is behind on that.

yg17 is correct. The US is the last (or at least among the last) countries to modernize their credit card operations to a chip and pin system, and arogge is almost certainly in the US. I recently heard on the radio that the US accounts for more than half of all cases of credit card fraud world-wide because they have not yet adopted the chip and pin technology.

I can speak from personal experience... Even the credit card companies don't look at the signature. A few years ago, while visiting the US, someone swiped my magnetic strip on my Master Card and created a bogus card, with which they made two purchases. I disputed the charges when I got the bill, and MC sent me the copies of the signed receipts - both of which had a bogus signature. Not only that... the name on the receipt was not even mine. It took me another 15 minutes on the phone with MC before I finally had the case moved from a simple 'dispute' to 'fraud'. Pointing out the use of the wrong name on the receipt was not enough to trigger the move to 'fraud' - I actually had to say the word 'fraud' before I was transferred... where it was dealt with in about a minute.

===

I also agree with arogge about needing to show photo ID in certain cases. I can imagine situations where I would not want the clerk to know my home address for instance. Imagine you are in a store late at night, going home, and the clerk has been making inappropriate comments. And then suddenly wants to see photo ID that includes your home address. I might just handle the situation by placing my thumb strategically over my license # and address however, leaving my photo and name visible. They already know what you look like (and likely have you on tape) and they already have your name from the card... so no harm there.

 

[ejb190]

So you don't want to show your ID when you make a purchase? Use cash. Case closed.

I do, however, draw the line at them scanning it or typing in the DL. That's a whole nuther ballgame that I simply will not play. I've walked out on purchases over that.

My parents own a business that in part rents equipment. If you are walking out with my $1000 floor sander, I AM copying your drivers license. U-Haul and other rental agencies will require that as well. For a regular purchase, I think I would agree with you.

It's not illegal to ask for ID. It is against the merchant agreement between the merchant and Visa/MC/etc to ask for ID, but I'm not sure how well it's enforced.

I'm curious. I'll have to pull my wife's CC machine contract and look. I'm not sure how well most merchants know their own contracts. Up until a couple years ago, it was against the contract to put a minimum purchase on CC purchases. Federal law changed that. There can also be a huge difference between the contracts from different service providers. We saw that when we decided to investigate changing providers for both shops.

 

[snberk103]

...
My parents own a business that in part rents equipment. If you are walking out with my $1000 floor sander, I AM copying your drivers license. U-Haul and other rental agencies will require that as well. For a regular purchase, I think I would agree with you.
...

In my opinion there is a difference between requiring photo ID to make a purchase/rental and requiring photo ID to use a CC for that purchase. I know in your example it doesn't really make a difference. But, if I was renting a piece of equipment and paying with cash I would absolutely understand the need to provide photo ID. It is part of the transaction - and not tied to the CC purchase.

I'm going to have to look at my merchant agreement too... you are also correct, I suspect, when you say the vast majority of merchants have a poor understanding of what they have agreed to.

 

[smithrh]

I was referring to a purchase.

Rentals are another thing altogether.

 

[Happybunny]

Credit Card transactions are done with PIN and CHIP here, so no need for signature any more, But in the US I have been asked to produce ID, and I did without an argument.

I really cannot see what is the problem.

 

[bradl]

Credit Card transactions are done with PIN and CHIP here, so no need for signature any more, But in the US I have been asked to produce ID, and I did without an argument.

I really cannot see what is the problem.

Simple. Personal experience here.

When I first went to Australia in 1995, I had 2 credit cards to my name; one with a $16,000 limit, the other with a $5000 limit. I didn't use the lower card for the most because of the interest rate, but definitely used the higher one because the interest rate was low, and that the exchange rate at the time would come roughly equal to the amount of interest I'd have to pay back. So, even push.

Anyway, I went to use the card for for a purchase, was asked for ID (at that time, Nebraska required signatures on their IDs), so I provided it. the merchant compared not only my photo, but signatures between the ID, the card, and the receipt I signed, and pointed out that I made the loops in my Ls a bit too wide and to be careful of that next time. It was weird for me to hear that, because no-one really even bothered in the US. She was looking at that because they were making sure the signatures were right or every close to matching because of fraud.

Fast forward 5 years. I'm in Las Vegas, got paid that day, and am getting gas/petrol, plus knew that I had roughly $8000 sitting in my bank account. I'm using my ATM/debit card. Go to fill my car, use my card, and come back with 'insufficient funds'. I try it again, same thing. "WTF" I'm thinking.. Luckily, I have enough cash on me to pay for it, and head home.

Turns out someone got hold of roughly 1000 credit card numbers, made fake cards, didn't sign them, and went on a shopping spree. $12,000 worth of office laser printers, dinner for 12, and a few other purchases in Simi Valley, California. all with me having the original card still in my hand. Even worse: none of the places asked for ID or to match signatures.

Took me 3 months to recover from that, as I had payments bouncing all over the place. From then on, I had put on the back of my cards "Ask for ID and check signature", until my bank finally put both on the front of the card. Now, I no longer have a problem.

But that is why you should check both, because while someone can easily put together a fake ID, if signatures don't match, someone is going to get busted.

BL.

 

[Happybunny]

Simple. Personal experience here.

When I first went to Australia in 1995, I had 2 credit cards to my name; one with a $16,000 limit, the other with a $5000 limit. I didn't use the lower card for the most because of the interest rate, but definitely used the higher one because the interest rate was low, and that the exchange rate at the time would come roughly equal to the amount of interest I'd have to pay back. So, even push.

Anyway, I went to use the card for for a purchase, was asked for ID (at that time, Nebraska required signatures on their IDs), so I provided it. the merchant compared not only my photo, but signatures between the ID, the card, and the receipt I signed, and pointed out that I made the loops in my Ls a bit too wide and to be careful of that next time. It was weird for me to hear that, because no-one really even bothered in the US. She was looking at that because they were making sure the signatures were right or every close to matching because of fraud.

Fast forward 5 years. I'm in Las Vegas, got paid that day, and am getting gas/petrol, plus knew that I had roughly $8000 sitting in my bank account. I'm using my ATM/debit card. Go to fill my car, use my card, and come back with 'insufficient funds'. I try it again, same thing. "WTF" I'm thinking.. Luckily, I have enough cash on me to pay for it, and head home.

Turns out someone got hold of roughly 1000 credit card numbers, made fake cards, didn't sign them, and went on a shopping spree. $12,000 worth of office laser printers, dinner for 12, and a few other purchases in Simi Valley, California. all with me having the original card still in my hand. Even worse: none of the places asked for ID or to match signatures.

Took me 3 months to recover from that, as I had payments bouncing all over the place. From then on, I had put on the back of my cards "Ask for ID and check signature", until my bank finally put both on the front of the card. Now, I no longer have a problem.

But that is why you should check both, because while someone can easily put together a fake ID, if signatures don't match, someone is going to get busted.

BL.

That is a fantastic story but I do not see the relevance.

I am not against ID and signature, but PIN and CHIP is just so much better. Magnetic strips are just to easy to clone.

 

[mobilehaathi]

That is a fantastic story but I do not see the relevance.

I am not against ID and signature, but PIN and CHIP is just so much better. Magnetic strips are just to easy to clone.

You'd think the savings from reducing fraud would more than pay for rolling that system out. It is a bit of a mystery to me why it wasn't done years ago.

 

[aristobrat]

Clearly, we need some education here too. It is a violation of the credit card merchant agreements to demand a photo ID such as a driver's license when a signed card is presented.

FWIW.

VISA

Although Visa rules do not preclude merchants from asking for cardholder ID except in the specific circumstances discussed in this guide, merchants cannot make an ID a condition of acceptance.

https://usa.visa.com/download/merchants/card-acceptance-guidelines-for-visa-merchants.pdf

MASTERCARD

A Merchant may request but must not require a Cardholder to avoider additional identification information as a condition of Card acceptance.

http://www.mastercard.com/us/merchant/pdf/BM-Entire_Manual_public.pdf

DISCOVER

If you have any doubts about the validity of the Discover Network Card or the Discover Network Card presenter, you may request additional identification from the Discover Network Card presenter and/or utilize procedures outlined in your Agreement.

http://renaissance-associates.com/images/agent portal docs/generic docs/Discover Guide_Final.pdf

AMEX doesn't state one way or the other, which makes it sound like CAN deny a sale if someone doesn't show an ID.

 

[smithrh]

You'd think the savings from reducing fraud would more than pay for rolling that system out. It is a bit of a mystery to me why it wasn't done years ago.

CC companies are not dummies. They make decisions based on vast mountains of data.

They've figure out that they make more money having easy & quick transitions vs. less (Chip & PIN has vulnerabilities) loss in fraud.

You see millions in fraud, they see billions in additional profits.

With more angst over Identity theft, the equation likely shifted a few years back. If they saw that people were transacting less due to worries about fraud, then boom, they'll change.

But not before.

 

[sviato]

Never been asked for ID and rarely a signature. Maybe soon the US will move forward with card payment innovation and start using chip/PIN/tap technology

 

[Mousse]

I've done this literally zero times, and don't even understand why "signature verification" would be effective.

When I sign those digital signature pads, it NEVER matches my actual signature. I don't see how they can verify anything from that. Dunno if this story is true or not, but this article shows just how useless signature verification is when done on those digital pads.

 

[Happybunny]

You'd think the savings from reducing fraud would more than pay for rolling that system out. It is a bit of a mystery to me why it wasn't done years ago.

This article in a UK newspaper might help.

Why is the US a decade behind Europe on 'chip and pin' cards?


http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...credit-card-breach-chip-pin-technology-europe

 

[aristobrat]

CC companies are not dummies. They make decisions based on vast mountains of data.

They've figure out that they make more money having easy & quick transitions vs. less (Chip & PIN has vulnerabilities) loss in fraud.

You see millions in fraud, they see billions in additional profits.

With more angst over Identity theft, the equation likely shifted a few years back. If they saw that people were transacting less due to worries about fraud, then boom, they'll change.

But not before.

FWIW, it's the merchants, not the credit card companies, that have to pay to replace all of the terminals with ones that accept EMV.

Maybe soon the US will move forward with card payment innovation and start using chip/PIN/tap technology

VISA's trying to speed things up in the US by introducing a liability shift for merchants in October 2015 (2017 for fuel-selling merchants).

After then, if a person uses a fraudulent card for a card-present transaction at a US merchant's location, and that US merchant hasn't enabled EMV (Chip and Pin) at that location, then that merchant can become responsible for the loss of that transaction.

 

[smithrh]

FWIW, it's the merchants, not the credit card companies, that have to pay to replace all of the terminals with ones that accept EMV.

Non-sequiter.

It's not really about the costs of replacing the terminals.

It's about the smoothness of the transaction (additional profits) vs. losses due to fraud.

 

[aristobrat]

This article in a UK newspaper might help.

Why is the US a decade behind Europe on 'chip and pin' cards?


http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...credit-card-breach-chip-pin-technology-europe

To me, US retailers are being "meh" about EMV because they don't get much out of it.

They're the ones having to pay millions of dollars to upgrade their terminals to support it, and most of what it does is stop fraud (at a higher level) that they didn't directly pay for in the first place.

I suppose you could make the point that they indirectly paid for that fraud in their transaction/processing fees, but does anyone here really thing VISA, MasterCard, AMEX, etc is going to lower them after EMV is rolled out in the US?

And EMV does nothing to make anyones card number less likely to be compromised in a Target-like hack. It just makes it harder for thieves to use stolen numbers for "card present" (in person) fraud. My guess is that means thieves will just start using it for more online fraud then. :/

----------

Non-sequiter.

It's not really about the costs of replacing the terminals.

It's about the smoothness of the transaction (additional profits) vs. losses due to fraud.

So your point is that the inconvenience of having to insert your card into a terminal, and leave it inserted until the transaction is done, is going to sway people to start using cash and checks, which will cause a profit loss to the issuers?

 

[mobilehaathi]

CC companies are not dummies. They make decisions based on vast mountains of data.

They've figure out that they make more money having easy & quick transitions vs. less (Chip & PIN has vulnerabilities) loss in fraud.

You see millions in fraud, they see billions in additional profits.

With more angst over Identity theft, the equation likely shifted a few years back. If they saw that people were transacting less due to worries about fraud, then boom, they'll change.

But not before.

Indeed, I'm not as naive as the final sentence of my previous post might suggest.

----------

This article in a UK newspaper might help.

Why is the US a decade behind Europe on 'chip and pin' cards?


http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...credit-card-breach-chip-pin-technology-europe

Thanks for that.

 

[r i c h]

So what's the point? Are you upset because a cashier is breaking the rules of the merchant agreement or is because showing your ID (which probably takes about as much time as locating a terminal and entering you PIN for a debit transaction) is an inconvenience?

As a business owner who accepts credit cards, if you don't want to show me your ID then you aren't getting the product(s) you ordered. With the way the merchant agreement (and fraud liability) is written I'm not willing to take a risk because someone can't, or won't, fish their ID out of their pocket.