15 replies to this topic

[Uncle Leo]

Can you articulate* exactly WHY the asking of ID offends you?

Is it simply because it is "against the rules" and you feel the need to be the unofficial enforcer of said rules? Is it because you fear the Rain Man will memorize your information and come get you in the middle of the night?

Yes, my questions are sarcastic, but know that I get offended also. For me, it's simply that I feel I have been accused of being a bad person just by the question. It's as if they're saying, "We think you're a thief, prove your innocence.". There's always that underlying presumptive body language and tone of guilt (yours) when they ask, also... then they get all cheery after you've successfully jumped through the hoops. I'm sorry (not really), but that offends me.

Some say, "I don't mind, they're matching me with my card and protecting me.". I don't buy that because I have zero-liability**. If zero liability were to cease, I would probably suck it up and be more accepting of ID checks, even if they remained against the rules, because at that point they would be protecting me (to some degree).

Oh, and the whole "I can get a fake ID in 30 seconds" bit is just laughable. Don't even go there.

Thanks for playing. :-)

* - Articulate does not include cut-and-paste responses. This thread is not about what to do, but rather how you think and/or feel.
** - Granted, 'zero liability' is not foolproof and does not work all the time, but it does a vast majority of the time.

[Medion]

I don't get offended. I take two approaches.

1. If there is a line behind me, I comply, show an ID (preferably my military ID as no key information is on the front, the SSN is on the back), and report them to Visa/Mc/Amex/whomever. NOTE: If they tell me that my military ID isn't a legit ID (this has happened), I tell them to get their manager RIGHT NOW, regardless of how long the line is. Enterprise pulled this crap on me once, so while my wife wasted their time inspecting the car we hadn't paid for yet, I rented a car at Hertz then grabbed her. I went straight to corporate for that one.

2. If there is no line behind me, I politely refuse to show my ID. If they still insist, I ask them if they understand that it is against their terms/contract with Visa/MC to require ID for a credit card purchase. If the cashier insists, I request to speak with the manager. When the manager says the same, I comply, and tell him that I wanted the fine from Visa/MC to be attributed to him by name, and not his employee who is just following his misguided rules. I then submit the complaint to Visa/MC with time/date and the name of the manager.

I don't get offended, I just don't want to be an ID theft victim. That's why I show a legal government ID that gives them the least info possible.

[frank22]

Can you articulate* exactly WHY the asking of ID offends you?

Is it simply because it is "against the rules" and you feel the need to be the unofficial enforcer of said rules? Is it because you fear the Rain Man will memorize your information and come get you in the middle of the night?

Yes, my questions are sarcastic, but know that I get offended also. For me, it's simply that I feel I have been accused of being a bad person just by the question. It's as if they're saying, "We think you're a thief, prove your innocence.". There's always that underlying presumptive body language and tone of guilt (yours) when they ask, also... then they get all cheery after you've successfully jumped through the hoops. I'm sorry (not really), but that offends me.

I find it difficult that someone would find this an issue(although I can't debate how you feel). Verification is not accusation, at least I don't see it that way, and there is a real difference in definitions. We are asked for proof of identity in many things, we have ID's for work, we need to prove age(are they calling me liar?) To get on a plane or to enter a court, do you feel they are calling you a terrorist or a judge killer? When I call my bank, I am glad they are asking me for verification before they will answer my questions or move money. I don't feel accused. Are the pharmacist calling me a druggie by requiring a prescription? What about a bank asking for ID for cashing a check? This is a part of modern life. I see a narcissism in feeling you are being accused of something just by the need for verification. When I do see others asked for ID, I don't see the feeling that they are feeling accused, I bet most see the reasons behind it. If this makes you feel accused, there are many times you must feel that.

Some say, "I don't mind, they're matching me with my card and protecting me.". I don't buy that because I have zero-liability**. If zero liability were to cease, I would probably suck it up and be more accepting of ID checks, even if they remained against the rules, because at that point they would be protecting me (to some degree).

At least your recognize that asking for ID can stop theft. I realize they are not directly protecting me, but I felt responsible both times I had my card used. Once it was stolen by a co-worker when I had my wallet in my jacket. Another time I dropped it and it was used by a neighbor. This was over a 15 year period. I think I can make a small effort to help reduce the potential for crime. That it doesn't directly effect me is OK, I think it is part of being a responsible citizen, and also a responsible customer of the bank. Not caring because we don't have liability is a reason the banks should actually want merchants to ask for ID, the cardholders don't have a stake in their cards being misused, and thus many people don't seem to care. Contrary to what some have posted here, the stores MUST have a stake, otherwise they would not feel it important to ask. I think if banks really did not want stores to ask, they would have a real, true, zero liability policy for the stores also.

It is a contract between the bank and merchant, not me and I wonder how many other contracts board members feel the need to enforce between other parties, especially for banks? At first, I wondered why merchants asked for ID because it was said they had zero liability too. I have since read from multiple sources that merchants often get charged, either indirectly or in charge-backs. If this is true, then the banks reap the benefits, but not the risk. True, the merchants get the benefits of added use, but get most of the risk. I am not really sure how it is handled though, and I really wonder about the added use because of not asking for ID. I think it should be up to the banks to decide, as long as they assume the risk.

The funny thing is I don't really feel all that strongly on this. I post on the topic because I don't see the logic in the concern and I see a strong sense of entitlement, many of the rants don't hold up to scrutiny. I understand some are truly concerned with identity theft, and to me this is the most valid argument. I balance out the chances of that happening compared to the chances of someone being able to use my card without ID, and I see the risk as small for ID theft in comparison. Any Joe can use a card with out ID, but it takes some real effort and risk to steal and use someone's ID. Anytime I see precautions about protecting yourself from ID theft, I never see not showing ID to a merchant as a suggestion, I believe because there are so many other, easier ways for ID crooks to get the info they want.

Another thing to point out: My experience is banks are not that aggressive in going after theft by using someone's card. They try to get some money back, but often don't prosecute. In one case with me, they asked him for 1/2 what was charged, and did not prosecute. In the other case the amount was a few hundred,and even when I told them I believed I knew who it was, they didn't want to pursue it because the amount was so small. It looks like the merchants care more, probably because they pay more?

Edited by frank22, 17 July 2011 - 07:24 PM.

[Uncle Leo]

Can you articulate* exactly WHY the asking of ID offends you?

Is it simply because it is "against the rules" and you feel the need to be the unofficial enforcer of said rules? Is it because you fear the Rain Man will memorize your information and come get you in the middle of the night?

Yes, my questions are sarcastic, but know that I get offended also. For me, it's simply that I feel I have been accused of being a bad person just by the question. It's as if they're saying, "We think you're a thief, prove your innocence.". There's always that underlying presumptive body language and tone of guilt (yours) when they ask, also... then they get all cheery after you've successfully jumped through the hoops. I'm sorry (not really), but that offends me.

I find it difficult that someone would find this an issue(although I can't debate how you feel). Verification is not accusation, at least I don't see it that way, and there is a real difference in definitions. We are asked for proof of identity in many things, we have ID's for work, we need to prove age(are they calling me liar?) To get on a plane or to enter a court, do you feel they are calling you a terrorist or a judge killer? When I call my bank, I am glad they are asking me for verification before they will answer my questions or move money. I don't feel accused. Are the pharmacist calling me a druggie by requiring a prescription? What about a bank asking for ID for cashing a check? This is a part of modern life. I see a narcissism in feeling you are being accused of something just by the need for verification. When I do see others asked for ID, I don't see the feeling that they are feeling accused, I bet most see the reasons behind it. If this makes you feel accused, there are many times you must feel that.

Most other instances I do not feel that way. As I already stated, I think the feelings I get on this issue have to do with the underlying tone and body language I sense when asked. Most of the scenarios you mention do not have that aspect. If anything, many of the people asking in those other scenarios come off as annoyed because they have no choice and are told to do so.

It is a contract between the bank and merchant, not me and I wonder how many other contracts board members feel the need to enforce between other parties, especially for banks?

Disagree. While I did not sign the contract itself between the bank and the merchant, I did sign on as a cardholder and these rules have been put in place precisely FOR ME as a customer. The bank (and Visa & MC) are representing my interests as laid out in the rules that they put in place because they felt they were good and necessary rules. The customer is still a party to the process.

If I get asked for ID, I'm not getting what I did literally sign on for as a customer of the credit card. Hence, the bank/Visa/MC protecting my interests, and holding up their end of the contract between me and them, which they would never know about if nobody says anything.

At first, I wondered why merchants asked for ID because it was said they had zero liability too. I have since read from multiple sources that merchants often get charged, either indirectly or in charge-backs. If this is true, then the banks reap the benefits, but not the risk. True, the merchants get the benefits of added use, but get most of the risk. I am not really sure how it is handled though, and I really wonder about the added use because of not asking for ID. I think it should be up to the banks to decide, as long as they assume the risk.

I have heard that the merchant take the risk as well. I don't think that's necessarily ethical, and I would change that if it were in my power, but that's beyond my ability to rectify. The fact still remains that the contract was signed to not require ID. No way around that.

Edited by Uncle Leo, 19 July 2011 - 01:12 PM.

[athensgaguy]

@frank22

I do not believe there is any evidence at all that checking ID reduces unauthorized use of a CC. That is why I do not want to show my ID. Security theater is nothing more than a distraction that in actuality reduces security rather than improving it.

I have given up the fight however, and am willing to show my US Passport Card. Of course, the people taking it have no training and have no way of telling if it's a valid ID and have probably never seen one other than mine. They just glance and continue on.

[eiui thelus]

I find it offensive because at the time of DH's ID being stolen by an employee who asked for ID and he complied, the FBI had reported that over 42% of all CC/ID thefts were perpetrated by store employees.
Would have been nice to know that before she sent us into a 15 year spiral

I'm offended that those numbers haven't improved and yet I'm the one being treated like the potential thief.

[hegemony]

I find it offensive because at the time of DH's ID being stolen by an employee who asked for ID and he complied, the FBI had reported that over 42% of all CC/ID thefts were perpetrated by store employees.
Would have been nice to know that before she sent us into a 15 year spiral
[/quote]
wow. that is scary.

[quote name='eiui thelus' timestamp='1312654448' post='4514242']
I'm offended that those numbers haven't improved and yet I'm the one being treated like the potential thief.
[/quote]
exactly. if you think I stole something call the cops. don't treat me like I am a thief.

[Lucky225]

I can articulate this rather easily. When I got married I took my wife's name. I immediately got a driver license over the counter in Arkansas the same day I was married with the new name and had surrendered my old license with the old name. My credit cards however, they still had the old name until new ones arrived in the mail. Therefore every time I tried to use my credit card the merchants in the area would try to ID me, and I did not have ID that matched, and retailers were denying me purchases, even if I offered ID. It began to tick me off, I wasn't about to carry around my marriage license and a bunch of other stuff just to make a credit card purchase, I looked up the rules and sure enough these merchants we're breaking them. I decided to stop showing ID ever since, it's caused scenes at restaurants where I've ALREADY ate a meal and am simply trying to pay for it, but I feel it's a matter of principal and educates staff about their responsibility. Another thing that ticks me off is the clerk seems to think because they're the one processing the transaction and you're in front of them that they can assert their pretend authority over you to make you produce something that isn't required. If you're pumping gas, making a purchase online, go through self-checkout at a grocery store, NO ONE IS ASKING YOU FOR ID. The minute you're in front of a clerk however, they seem to think YOUR transaction is different then the person outside pumping gas at the SAME merchant, or more important then the person using their credit card one aisle over at self checkout who chooses to bag their own groceries. And finally, PREPAID CREDIT CARDS OFTEN DO NOT HAVE YOUR NAME ON THEM. This is the nail in the coffin for me, you see if you do a simple google news search for credit card fraud you will find TONS of articles of thieves using FAKE IDs to make purchases on stolen credit cards, the signature stripe on your credit card wasn't RANDOMLY put there, it is there for a reason. Look at the back of your credit card, it states "NOT VALID UNLESS SIGNED", the clerk is supposed to compare the signature on the BACK of the card to that of the signature on the receipt. However, while clerks are busy ASKING FOR and ACCEPTING FAKE IDs from CROOKS, they are NOT checking the signature on the back of valid signed cards, INCLUDING prepaid credit cards that DO NOT BEAR A NAME. So because they're so fixated on a false sense of security (checking IDs), meanwhile someone's prepaid credit card that gets stolen, when they present that to these ID checking clerks, it's like a dear in headlights, they think 'well no name, i guess it's like a gift card ANYONE can use it'. When that's SIMPLY NOT TRUE. If they checked the SIGNATURE of the cardholder on the back of that prepaid credit card, if it didn't match, they could make a code 10 call and find out it's possibly stolen or prevent a fraud from happening. The same is true for stolen credit cards that thieves don't seem to have ANY ISSUE obtaining fake IDs for. Last but not least, YOUR ID CONTAINS YOUR ADDRESS AND ZIP CODE. Most Non face-to-face transactions such as at the gas pump or online REQUIRE your billing address to verify the purchase since your signature can not be compared, almost ALWAYS the address on your ID will be that address. There have been reported cases of clerks using 'pen cams' to record the card number as well as the 3 digits on the back by covertly holding the card up to the pen camera, turning it over to record the cvv # and asking for ID to 'compare the signature on the card to that on an ID', and then using the camera to record the ID info.. The clerk then later makes internet purchases using your CARD and BILLING ADDRESS. So to those of you saying 'they're just looking at it, it's not like they're memorizing it' -- THEY DON'T HAVE TO MEMORIZE ANYTHING WHEN VIDEO CAMERAS CAN BE STORED ON THEM THE SIZE OF A PEN.

So to recap:

1) CREDIT CARDS DO NOT ALWAYS BEAR THE NAME OF THE CARDHOLDER (Recent marriage/name change, prepaid credit cards)
2) CREDIT CARDS CAN BE USED AT GAS PUMPS, SELF CHECKOUT, INTERNET ETC WITHOUT ANY INTERACTION WITH THE CLERK WHO THINKS THEY'RE ABOVE YOU
3) CREDIT CARDS HAVE A SIGNATURE STRIPE FOR A REASON, IF MERCHANTS CHECKED TO MAKE SURE CARDS WERE SIGNED, AND COMPARED THE SIGNATURES they might actually stop LOSING charge backs, prevent a fraud, and stop assisting CROOKS with FAKE IDs.
4) SHOWING YOUR ID EXPOSES YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION, WHICH CAN BE RECORDED EASILY WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE, AND USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CARD INFO TO MAKE PURCHASES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE *NOT* GO THROUGH.

[FlyingRon]

Try opening an online banking account these days. You won't get it without a driver's license. The DL number has supplanted the SSN as the ID check of choice for these type transactions. The problem is people who will go to the wall protecting their SSN will hand over their DL without batting an eye.

[jabroni8218]

I am a college student and the 5 people using credit ahead of me don't get a single look while the guy looking at mine demands ID, spends a minute looking at it since it's out of state and asks for secondary ID or "I can use another payment method".

Complained to manager, against policy, did not have to present ID next time I bought. Since the manager apologized I didn't report it to Visa.

[funkymrrogers]

When merchants are checking signatures and security features of cards the following is true:


Consumer liability -
Consumers are liable in cases of credit card fraud for only $50 of fraudulent transactions if they are reported in 60 days or less. This is federal law. Some credit cards feature zero liability. The only condition of this liability limitation is that the card must be signed when activated. That's not verbatim written into the law, but it's a part of the cardholder agreement and that agreement must be abided for the limitation.

Merchant liability -
The merchant is not liable for fraudulent transactions. Merchant must have a matching signature for the card that they accepted and follow proper acceptance procedure such as checking that the number read by the magstripe reader matches the number on the card, and the other security features such as holo logo, signature pad and uv watermark.

When merchants are asking for ID and ignoring the signature comparison step of card acceptance the following is true:


Consumer risk-
Before the consumer was only exposed by $50, or $0, depending on the card. Showing ID exposes a consumer to risk of identity fraud, now the liability has no limit. Want to be on the hook for a new boat and a garage full of cars? Show that ID. Credit Card Fraud is unequal to Identity Fraud. Now let's get back to that initial $50 liability real quick. That $50 is going to be spent at a pay at the pump gas station, that's how stolen cards are validated by thieves. It doesn't matter how many cashiers check IDs, there's nothing one can do to stop that first $50 (except get a better card). As far as remembering ID details, a small portion of the population can do this, the rest have a spare $40 to throw at a pen camera (example: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16881339031)

Merchant risk-
To keep a payment in a chargeback situation, a merchant simply has to respond with the sales slip containing the signature that was matched. If you're not in the habit of refusing to show ID watch the next cashier that asks you, I bet they did not verify the signature. Visa/MC do not care how many ID's a merchant checks, only that the signature matches.


Checking IDs benefits neither the consumer or the merchant, it opens up the consumer to Identity Fraud and the merchant to Credit Card Fraud.


Hopefully that was articulate enough?

[Scorefighter]

I am a college student and the 5 people using credit ahead of me don't get a single look while the guy looking at mine demands ID, spends a minute looking at it since it's out of state and asks for secondary ID or "I can use another payment method".

Complained to manager, against policy, did not have to present ID next time I bought. Since the manager apologized I didn't report it to Visa.

I can relate. This happens not just to those in school! The thing that confuses me on the issue is when the store states that asking for ID IS their policy. Kohls and Radio Shack appear to be the worst offenders. (We may have a case of store policy vs credit card policy here. I know some people find it humorous, comical, offensive when asked for ID, and i too feel the same tinge of accusation as OP when asked.. but i usually comply, in a manner consistent with the second poster. And i have had stores decline the sale when i would not show it. AutoZone and Advance in particular WILL NOT[ sell to you if you do not show ID. I have had managers be real picks to me about this, and i will not forget that experience. They were very rude and condescending, and thought it was all a joke. I wish i had a video camera. I would be paid, if i could revisit that. Hence, i have taken an interest in this topic. I like to comply with policy, but store and Visa/MC/Amex/Discover policies differ on this issue! This confuses me. And i am a middle-aged woman!)

Same with the Post Office. In the one uptown, i was asked for ID when i was attempting to use my credit card. The one downtown, i can use whatever card i want. Same with QuickChek store. Anything under $75 I am good to go.

What is the proper procedure if you are asked for ID in a store that you know for a fact does NOT have that policy, and what stores do not have the policy of asking for ID with a credit transaction? IIRC, Kohls DOES have the policy (store policy) of asking for ID with credit purchase.

[Need More RWHP]

Merchants do not take responsibility when our information is leaked and they're not held to same level of accountability as health care providers with our health information.

Some merchants sneakily steal our DL# and catalog them into database for their own purpose without even telling us.

Full name, address, DOB can gain a lot of access.

Call a hospital to validate an appointment. It's not just the name. It's always name & DOB combination.

Just ask some female employees and manager what their age is. That would be rude and some may express opposition. Understandable. Now, WHY exactly should they have access to such information on customers as a condition of making a purchase?

Edited by Need More RWHP, 25 December 2011 - 03:21 AM.

[thelowpriceleader]

It isn't policy at Kohls. Email their escalated customer service and they will address it with the store and district manager involved. cscc.escalated@kohls.com

[Jeeplady]

I also refuse to show ID and have taught my college age daughters the same, but mainly for safety reasons. Humans are creatures of habit. Each daughter has a set class schedule for a semester. They will typically buy gas, food, clothes, etc at the same places at about the same time each week. In a small college town, every time she shows her ID to the creepy guy behind the register it gives him another chance to memorize her address, and to stalk or maybe assault her after he gets off work. Not worth giving up personal safety IMO.

[Need More RWHP]

I also refuse to show ID and have taught my college age daughters the same, but mainly for safety reasons. Humans are creatures of habit. Each daughter has a set class schedule for a semester. They will typically buy gas, food, clothes, etc at the same places at about the same time each week. In a small college town, every time she shows her ID to the creepy guy behind the register it gives him another chance to memorize her address, and to stalk or maybe assault her after he gets off work. Not worth giving up personal safety IMO.

Exactly and a valid reason for resisting to show ID.