Asking for ID

[cb_opus]

I always have a problem with my signature rubbing off on the back of my cards.

 

I use an extra fine point Sharpie - works great. Seriously, I won't sign a card with anything else.

[MarvBear]

We have a very special forum for all of this.

 

Carry on there all you like.

[Saria]

I always have a problem with my signature rubbing off on the back of my cards.

 

I use an extra fine point Sharpie - works great. Seriously, I won't sign a card with anything else.

 

+1 Works like a charm.

[GEORGE]

While George is technically correct - Visa/MC policy states a signature is all that is needed, and ID is not required, I fail to see the harm caused by verifying that the person that is trying to use the card is actually the person to whom the card is issued by seeing a picture ID (obviously it is not 100% foolproof).

 

So you show them your DL, and they see if the name matches the card, and that the picture matches the person handing them the card. What does this take, 15 seconds? I refuse to believe that anyone is sooooo important that 15 seconds out of their lives is going to make a huge difference. And if this prevents one fraudulent purchase on your card, which will take a heck of a lot longer than 15 seconds to clear up...why the complaining?

 

Furthermore, the notion that a cashier is going to steal your identity by looking at your DL is ridiculous. First, you are assuming the cashier is a thief, second that they can remember the info from a 15 second glance, and third, they are saavy enough to actual do something with it. If you live your life with that level of paranoia, I feel bad for you.

ASK TILL THE COWS COME HOME

 

I SAY NO...THE BUSINESS BACKS-OFF NOT ME

 

I NEED NO SO-CALLED "PROTECTION" FROM THE BUSINESS

 

IF YOU FEEL SAFER BY SHOWING ID...DON'T LET ME STOP YOU

 

SHOW ID WHEN YOU PAY CASH FOR ALL I CARE IF THAT MAKES YOU FEEL SAFER

Edited April 30, 2010 by GEORGE

[Quarterchips]

ID for cash transactions isn't a bad idea, if (and this is a big if) the serial # from each bill & your DL# were recorded in some type of government data tracking system. That way you could link each time that bill was passed.

 

Could prevent money laundering, help tax evasion, prevent fake bills. The govt would be able to monitor us all for our own safety/protection.

 

Good idea George!!

Edited April 30, 2010 by Quarterchips

[GEORGE]

ID for cash transactions isn't a bad idea, if (and this is a big if) the serial # from each bill & your DL# were recorded in some type of government data tracking system. That way you could link each time that bill was passed.

 

Could prevent money laundering, help tax evasion, prevent fake bills. The govt would be able to monitor us all for our own safety/protection.

 

Good idea George!!

[green2408]

While George is technically correct - Visa/MC policy states a signature is all that is needed, and ID is not required, I fail to see the harm caused by verifying that the person that is trying to use the card is actually the person to whom the card is issued by seeing a picture ID (obviously it is not 100% foolproof).

 

So you show them your DL, and they see if the name matches the card, and that the picture matches the person handing them the card. What does this take, 15 seconds? I refuse to believe that anyone is sooooo important that 15 seconds out of their lives is going to make a huge difference. And if this prevents one fraudulent purchase on your card, which will take a heck of a lot longer than 15 seconds to clear up...why the complaining?

 

Furthermore, the notion that a cashier is going to steal your identity by looking at your DL is ridiculous. First, you are assuming the cashier is a thief, second that they can remember the info from a 15 second glance, and third, they are saavy enough to actual do something with it. If you live your life with that level of paranoia, I feel bad for you.

 

 

Actually, an efficiency expert who added up all those 15 secs might determine that the total time was not insignificant and that the cost was not worth the benefit.

 

I always think it's interesting that the people here who are in favor of showing ID to minimum wage clerks are so willing to second guess the credit card companies, who, presumably, have the greatest interest in preventing credit card fraud and who have thought long and hard about this issue, and who have determined and spelled out contractually procedures for accepting credit cards - and requiring ID is not one of them. Why not just go with the rules of the company that owns the card???

 

It's perhaps counterintuitive that showing an ID doesn't help deter credit card fraud, but remember that the minimum wage worker you're showing your card to has no expertise in examining fake IDs and what procedures would that person follow if he/she suspected a fake ID? Deny the sale? I suspect the credit card companies have determined that there would be a higher rate of false positives than actual deterance of fraud, and that the only thing showing ID does is cost the company money in terms of lost time and waste the time of honest people.

[GEORGE]

While George is technically correct - Visa/MC policy states a signature is all that is needed, and ID is not required, I fail to see the harm caused by verifying that the person that is trying to use the card is actually the person to whom the card is issued by seeing a picture ID (obviously it is not 100% foolproof).

 

So you show them your DL, and they see if the name matches the card, and that the picture matches the person handing them the card. What does this take, 15 seconds? I refuse to believe that anyone is sooooo important that 15 seconds out of their lives is going to make a huge difference. And if this prevents one fraudulent purchase on your card, which will take a heck of a lot longer than 15 seconds to clear up...why the complaining?

 

Furthermore, the notion that a cashier is going to steal your identity by looking at your DL is ridiculous. First, you are assuming the cashier is a thief, second that they can remember the info from a 15 second glance, and third, they are saavy enough to actual do something with it. If you live your life with that level of paranoia, I feel bad for you.

 

 

Actually, an efficiency expert who added up all those 15 secs might determine that the total time was not insignificant and that the cost was not worth the benefit.

 

I always think it's interesting that the people here who are in favor of showing ID to minimum wage clerks are so willing to second guess the credit card companies, who, presumably, have the greatest interest in preventing credit card fraud and who have thought long and hard about this issue, and who have determined and spelled out contractually procedures for accepting credit cards - and requiring ID is not one of them. Why not just go with the rules of the company that owns the card???

 

It's perhaps counterintuitive that showing an ID doesn't help deter credit card fraud, but remember that the minimum wage worker you're showing your card to has no expertise in examining fake IDs and what procedures would that person follow if he/she suspected a fake ID? Deny the sale? I suspect the credit card companies have determined that there would be a higher rate of false positives than actual deterance of fraud, and that the only thing showing ID does is cost the company money in terms of lost time and waste the time of honest people.

I (personally) have picked up only 25 or 30 credit cards over 25+ years

 

I have no idea if they were STOLEN or they just didn't pay their bill

 

"IF" that number was 500 or 1,000 or even 5,000 I would probably say there are...

STOLEN CARDS OUT THERE...EVERYWHERE AND YOU BETTER STOP THEM AT ALL COST

 

WOULDN'T "CASH" BE AN EASIER PRODUCT TO THEFT???

Edited April 30, 2010 by GEORGE

[Grizzly Bear]

ID requirements are of absolutely no protection to the card holder. Anyone with a stolen card can simply move on to the next merchant.

[centex]

ID requirements are of absolutely no protection to the card holder. Anyone with a stolen card can simply move on to the next merchant.

 

personally, I am a firm believer in specific deterrence. And in the example you give, asking for ID serves as specific deterrence of the crime.

[Grizzly Bear]

The vast majority of merchants honor their contract, do not treat their customers like criminals, and do not require an ID. Those who do are not deterring anything because it would be very easy to max out a card in short order.

Edited May 3, 2010 by Grizzly Bear

[GEORGE]

I STILL WANT TO KNOW WHO I AM PROTECTING IF I ACTUALLY DO SHOW MY ID WITH MY CARD

 

[BBQ123]

It is irrelevant to the merchant whether the person using the card is the actual card holder or not. All that matters is if the card is approved when swiped and the signatures match.

[thelowpriceleader]

Many customers are so irresponsible that they don't want to be responsible for safeguarding their card and want the merchant to watch out for them and check ID to make sure nobody else uses their card. Most people I know love showing ID, though I am able to sway some of them. It is funny how many merchants that ask for ID back down when you refuse to show it to them, too. Sort of blows the whole point of asking... if they are going to just back down immediately when you refuse to show it to them.

[BBQ123]

Many customers are so irresponsible that they don't want to be responsible for safeguarding their card and want the merchant to watch out for them and check ID to make sure nobody else uses their card. Most people I know love showing ID, though I am able to sway some of them. It is funny how many merchants that ask for ID back down when you refuse to show it to them, too. Sort of blows the whole point of asking... if they are going to just back down immediately when you refuse to show it to them.

 

 

Well they are bound by contract to back down... failure to adhere can lead to major fines.

[lolipop]

It is irrelevant to the merchant whether the person using the card is the actual card holder or not. All that matters is if the card is approved when swiped and the signatures match.

So you are saying it's OK to you a stolen card as long as it is approved?