Wonder if this will help cash payers?

[Nishu]

Requiring ID's ticks me off to no end. There's absolutely no reason for it, as the entire point of accepting credit cards is the fact that they can get the added sales of on-credit purchases without accepting the risk of non-payment. In the case of fraud, the credit card companies cover the cost.

[krbshappy71]

Never found this to be true. First they take my deductible, Then they send me an estimated bill before the ins. pays, then they send me a bill for the diff. the ins. didn't pay from their estimate.
And on the rare occasion they overcharged they try to "credit" my acct. like I don't need the diff. back.
I have learned to ignore the "estimate" bill and pay when the ins. co. is done screwing around.

Grr to this, happened to me as well but I was required to pay the full amount estimated BEFORE the procedure would be done. What?!! It was an oral surgeon, not regular dentist. So I forked out the "estimate" of $350, in cash no discount, then later received a bill wanting $39 more!! It was like an insult to injury feeling.

[krbshappy71]

Requiring ID's ticks me off to no end. There's absolutely no reason for it, as the entire point of accepting credit cards is the fact that they can get the added sales of on-credit purchases without accepting the risk of non-payment. In the case of fraud, the credit card companies cover the cost.

Two different ways of thinking, I guess. I write "see photo i.d." on my credit card instead of signing it. I'd rather catch the fraud on the front end, not deal with it after its been done. When I pull out my card, I pull out my i.d., doesn't take any extra time because I know I'll be doing it.

[Nishu]

Two different ways of thinking, I guess. I write "see photo i.d." on my credit card instead of signing it. I'd rather catch the fraud on the front end, not deal with it after its been done. When I pull out my card, I pull out my i.d., doesn't take any extra time because I know I'll be doing it.

You're in violation of the agreement that you accept in order to use that card. Signing the back of the card isn't an option. It clearly states "Not valid unless signed."

feedle.net “See ID”: Bad Idea!

“If the signature on the ‘AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE’ strip does not reasonably match the signature provided to the Bank on the master VISA/Mastercard Application Form, the Credit Card is not considered to be valid. This includes instructions to accepting merchants to verify identification (with words like “CHECK ID” or “SEE ID”) or other such non-signatures. Signatures are to be made using plain ink in contrasting colors to the background that should last the anticipated lifetime on the card and not “rub off” with normal wear. [...] The only item the Customer is allowed to affix, inscribe, attach, write, or otherwise modify on the card is the ‘AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE’ strip on the back of the card with their full legal signature matching the name on the front of the card. Any other alterations to the card renders the card invalid and subject to confiscation by the Bank.”

That sounds pretty clear and unambiguous there. In fact, I’ll give them extra credit on this one: while most of the Cardholder Agreement I have is full of pretty complex legal mumbo-jumbo, these two sentences are clear and concise, and give a precise statement of what you’re supposed to do with that goofy white strip on the back. They even specifically instruct you to not write “SEE ID” on the card.

If you are not using your card according to the agreement that we all accept when we use them, you're running the risk of footing the bill for fraud committed against your card.

As long as you're using the card according to the agreement, you should not be liable for any fraud and writing "See ID" on the back is pointless.

[frugalfranny]

I get asked for my ID every time I use my credit card at Wal-Mart. I don't mind, though.

I don't mind it either.........at least they are checking to see if the DL meets the name on the card..........course if they are stolen they will probably have both to begin with..........still nice to have them check.

I don't give a R. A. if it is 'against the rules'...........I don't want the headache of identity theft and if this catches ANY of it.......it is okay with me.

[Palooka]

I never sign my name on my CC's in hopes that they will ask for ID. And never heard of fraud not being taken care of if the card wasn't signed.

[Nishu]

I never sign my name on my CC's in hopes that they will ask for ID. And never heard of fraud not being taken care of if the card wasn't signed.

I have, although it was kind of second hand.

The fact is that these cards were sold to the consumer largely on the fact that they don't require ID.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgE_O5H7DvU]YouTube - Deion Sanders Visa Check Card Commercial from 1996[/ame]

In addition to the fact that SEE ID the card agreement, NONE of the major credit card companies suggest and in fact they specifically tell you not to.

Should you sign your credit card or write 'See ID' on it

'See ID' against Visa, MasterCard rules
Chris Monteiro, spokesman for MasterCard, says, "Technically, a MasterCard is not valid unless signed by the authorized cardholder. If a person has not signed his card, the merchant technically should not complete the transaction." The merchant can only complete the transaction on an unsigned card if the cardholder signs the card in front of the employee and then produces valid identification proving their identity, Monteiro says. The cardholder then has nothing to gain by refusing to write anything but his signature on the signature panel.

Visa's policy is nearly identical to MasterCard's. Visa covers this topic in its "Rules for Merchants" handbook. There is a section entitled "See ID," which says: "See ID or Check for ID is not a valid substitute for a signature. The customer must sign the card, in your presence." And if the customer refuses? "A refusal to sign means the card is still invalid and cannot be accepted." The handbook then reminds merchants that if they ignore this mandate and accept an unsigned card anyway, they risk financial liability should the cardholder later dispute the charge.

In another section, the Visa handbook also prohibits merchants from demanding identification as a condition of the sale -- so if the merchant does accept your unsigned card, they technically cannot force you to show identification. The converse is true for signed cards as well: A merchant cannot refuse a transaction if you choose not to produce identification, and a merchant does not have to ask for additional identification when presented a signed credit card.

And YES, I do get wound up about this and I understand that my frustration is totally weird, but hear me out. Whenever merchants and consumers perpetuate this, they're basically making it more difficult for me to use my perfectly legitimate card without my ID, which is 100% within the agreement that signed and the primary reason that I use check cards.

I guess I just don't understand. If you're that afraid of being inconvenienced by having to file a fraud complaint, and if you're that okay with showing ID, my gosh, just write a check or use cash or something!

[DJ1972]

Our dentist gives a 10% discount to patients that pay cash. When I had a $250 emergency room deductible, they gave me a 20% discount for paying in full and with cash.

[LuLuBleen]

If you're that afraid of being inconvenienced by having to file a fraud complaint, and if you're that okay with showing ID, my gosh, just write a check or use cash or something!

It's more inconvenient to file a fraud complaint than to have a WM clerk check my ID. At my WM, they really do check because they always, always comment on my DL picture.

Oh, don't get me started on check-writers. I always get behind the ones who don't even begin digging in the bottom of their purse for their checkbook until the clerk gives them the total. Oy!

[Nishu]

It's more inconvenient to file a fraud complaint than to have a WM clerk check my ID.

I would disagree on this because I've filed a fraud complaint with Chase and it took 5-10 minutes of my time, once in the entire ten years that I have been using debit/check cards. In that same period of time I've used my cards probably thousands of times. Multiply an ID check by that many times and it's definitely not more convenient. And if you don't carry an ID with you or just happen to not have it, an ID check can seriously ruin your day.

You also seem to be suggesting that an ID check will prevent fraud, and that's absolutely not true. The one time my cards have been used fraudulently, the thief ran up several thousand dollars in the Philllipines and both mine and my husband's cards were still in our pockets. Gas pumps don't require ID. Internet purchases don't require ID. Even if the store does ask for an ID check when a criminal is trying to use your card, he's going to say "oops, I can't seem to find my driver's license" and walk right out of the store and find somewhere else to use it.

Don't fool yourself into thinking that not signing the back of your card is going to provide you any protection against fraud. It's not going to. The best it can do is change the way the fraud is perpetrated.

[frugalfranny]

And YES, I do get wound up about this and I understand that my frustration is totally weird, but hear me out. Whenever merchants and consumers perpetuate this, they're basically making it more difficult for me to use my perfectly legitimate card without my ID, which is 100% within the agreement that signed and the primary reason that I use check cards.

I guess I just don't understand. If you're that afraid of being inconvenienced by having to file a fraud complaint, and if you're that okay with showing ID, my gosh, just write a check or use cash or something!

I understand that we can each do our own thing with our cards.........checks..........cash........whatever. And there are many reasons why we do this............to each his own.

I will continue to NOT sign my cards...........put "ask for ID" on the back of them......and yes, I KNOW that I won't be able to use these at the post office cause unless your card is SIGNED.......they won't take it.............and life will go on.

I hope they keep asking for ID. The few times that I use my card.......I have an extra 30 seconds to show it to them.

[Palooka]

You also seem to be suggesting that an ID check will prevent fraud, and that's absolutely not true. The one time my cards have been used fraudulently, the thief ran up several thousand dollars in the Philllipines and both mine and my husband's cards were still in our pockets. Gas pumps don't require ID. Internet purchases don't require ID. Even if the store does ask for an ID check when a criminal is trying to use your card, he's going to say "oops, I can't seem to find my driver's license" and walk right out of the store and find somewhere else to use it.

You make a good point and this is why it doesn't really matter if it's not signed.

[khaski]

My dentist gives us discounts for paying in cash, IF we're having a bunch of stuff done at once (like recently when 3 of us all had our cleaning within 2 or 3 weeks of eachother). We have no dental insurance, i don't get the impression there's a 'set' discount, but I think it's more of a 'thank you' because they know they don't have to hunt us down for the $300+ bill.

On the flip side, my hubby is having wisdom teeth out next month- we will be paying cash, over $900, but no discount for cash, and no insurance coverage