A MasterCard spokesperson has confirmed, just like we’ve been telling you all along, that a store cannot refuse to sell you something solely because you refuse to provide additional identification along with your MasterCard. The only time it’s ok is if it’s required for shipping, or when you’re at a gas pump or making orders via internet, phone, or mail, in which case they can use the MasterCard Address Verification System (AVS). But if you’re in a store, right in front of them, in the flesh, it violates their MasterCard merchant agreement. Consumers experiencing this can fill out a Merchant Violation form found in the FAQ/Contact US part of Mastercard.com. Full statement, inside…
As provided Rule 5.6.3, Additional Cardholder Identification, of the MasterCard Rules manual, a MasterCard merchant must not refuse to complete a transaction solely because a customer who has presented a valid MasterCard card refuses to provide additional identification information, such as a personal ID, except as MasterCard specifically permits or requires.
A merchant may require additional identification if the information needed to complete the transaction, such as for shipping purposes. For transactions at unattended terminals such as card-activated gas pumps or transactions conducted on the Internet, by phone, or by mail, a merchant may request address information in order to use the MasterCard Address Verification System (AVS). By using AVS, the merchant can confirm that the address information provided matches the information that the card issuer has on file. Additionally, if the MasterCard card is unsigned, a merchant must request personal identification (but not record it) and require the cardholder to sign the card before completing the transaction.
If a cardholder encounters a MasterCard merchant that refuses to honor a MasterCard card without additional identification information, the cardholder may complete the Merchant Violation form found in the FAQs/Contact Us section of http://www.mastercard.com. The MasterCard Rules manual is also available at http://www.mastercard.com(click on “MasterCard Worldwide Rules”).
Regards,
Daniel F. Balistierri
MasterCard WorldWide
(Photo: Sam Wilkinson)
More From Consumerist
-
Walmart Comes Out Against Credit Card Swipe Fee Settlement
-
Visa, MasterCard Agree To Let Merchants Add Surcharges To Credit Card Purchases
-
Get Ready To Pay Surcharge Every Time You Pay With Credit Card
-
MasterCard’s New MasterPass Seeks To Cut Out That Annoying “Waiting To Checkout” Thing
-
PayPal Blocked Access To My Account After Denying Me A Debit Card
Mr. Belisle, well done. And this, amigos, is why I try to pay as much as I can with cash.
Why does this story kind of infer that it’s a GOOD thing they cannot require you to show I.D.? I say “Thank you” everytime I’m asked. I WANT them to check and make sure nobody else is using my credit card, which has a pretty high max. In fact, like some others here, my card has “See I.D.” on the back where the signature should be.
Hell, they should just put pictures of the cardholders on the damn cards. Cut down on fraud and make all of this arguing moot.
@BlackFlag55: But credit cards can be a “Good thing” if used properly. I use mine to pay for almost everything that I can because I like the various bonuses I get with my card for spending money with them as well as the extended warranty coverage that Visa offers on my purchases. Of course this really only works if you can pay them off each month and luckily I have been able to do that so far.
It is just stunning to read some of the posts that claim that any acquiring bank (the ones who sign up merchants) may abrogate the Visa/MC regs. About anything.
If the exception isn’t written in the master operating agreement, it ain’t gonna fly. BofA is a major force in the industry for sure. But it doesn’t dare take on Visa/MC on the issue of making a typical transaction more restrictive. This is especially true as cardholders are beginning to ratchet down their spending. The fraud issue is a real one, but it has long been decided that the losses incurred are dwarfed by the convenience factor for the cardholder.
I worked in the industry. I know what it is like when a Visa/MC audit/inspection turns up a non-compliance issue. Does the fear of God ring a bell?
Thanks to this site for the definitive follow-up! Great job.
@Michael Belisle: Yes, we’ve all read that part of the guide, but your first quote says “Your merchant agreement and the Visa U.S.A. Inc. Operating Regulations take precedence over this guide or any updates to its information.” So what a lot of people are wondering is if specific merchant agreements allow this behavior or not.
Err…. I live in Detroit, so I get ID’d for both my debit card and my Mastercard. I definitely do not mind, and would never complain because if I lose either card, I do not want someone to be able to go and use it without them carding the person.
@Corporate-Shill:
That document I linked clearly entitled “Rules for VISA Merchants.” It’s on page one of the PDF file.
Yes, generally the merchant deals with a bank, not directly with VISA. However, VISA deals with the bank, allowing them to process transactions for their institution over the VISA network. Thus, the Bank and subsequently it’s customers are obliged to abide by VISA’s rules.
@eelmonger: If you keep reading my tediously long post, I mention that section 4.2.C.1.c of the binding regulations (not the guide) says that all merchant agreements must comply with the regulations. The second block quote settles the issue with basically the same message as Balistierri. So, no, a merchant agreement cannot allow this behavior since the regulations prohibit it.
I want to change the back of my card from “See ID” to “What part about ‘See ID’ don’t you F***ing get??” because I’d say 1 out of every 50 merchants actually fulfill my “See ID” request. Many of the places I go do not even ask for a signature anymore (some BS about less than $25 or something). I actually commend companies and workers that ask for additional ID when using a Credit Card. It’s the people who get bent out of shape about it that deserve to have their cards and identity stolen.
@emich27: If your signature isn’t also on there (skip to the rest of this paragraph if it is), then I imagine no merchant has done what they’re supposed to do: ask for your ID, and then force you to sign the card before accepting it. What part of “not valid unless signed” don’t you (f***ing) get?
The new thing about not requiring a signature for transactions under $25 isn’t BS. It’s in the rules. The world would be a better place if merchants trained their employees to follow the rules instead of making up their own. Checking IDs is a false sense of security that doesn’t prevent fraud.
@TheDude06:
The various statements being made about the merchant not having to pay for fraudulent charges is completely untrue. Once a legitimate cardholder discovers that his or her card number has been stolen, all fraudulent charges on that card typically go into a “chargeback” phase. A chargeback means that the full amount of the transaction is refunded–in other words, the merchant is never allowed to retain funds collected from fraudulent charges.
So, the merchant always loses in cases of fraud. While it might be tempting to say “big deal” in cases where the fraud has occurred at a huge, national chain store, imagine how crippling just a few high-value chargebacks might be to mom and pop shops selling high ticket items.
Food for thought the next time one feels tempted to throw a consumer rights hissy fit when asked to show ID.
“mractor at 04:48 PM on 06/13/08 Reply by Email *
@Corny.fleur: Yes – the card must be signed to be valid. By writing “See ID” on the back the card is still invalid and must be signed – except now it is defaced. Merchants have not learned this tidbit yet, so they will most likely take the card with your ID, but I would request a replacement card so that it can be validated with a legible signature.”
I would like you to cite your source for this information. I have heard both way from people who think they know but have not been able to find it in writing as a ‘law/regulation’. So please cite your source.
Disregard my last post. I didnt read all the posts before I posted it. I apologize. Thanks to the person who posted all the rules and regulations.
@Michael Belisle: Actually, my card IS signed and it asks to “See ID” next to my signature as well. And it’s not a false sense of security – anyone can forge a signature, but an ID confirms the card is mine by matching my name and my face.
@TheDude06:
Who’s to say, though, that the merchant is going to match signatures? Nine times out of ten, especially at places where you can swipe the card yourself, they don’t look at the card, much less compare the signatures . They just swipe it, take the receipt and give it to you. I’ve only ever been carded when they take the card and run it themselves, and then only a very few times.
Cheers!
I also wish they WOULD ask for ID. Why would anyone be against this? It can’t really be because its “annoying” or because it “wastest time”… if that were the case then the reasoning is flawed. I am sure the no ID crowd waste a LOT MORE time explaining to an 18 year old clerk that the Credit Card Agreement does not require ID verification in each instance. I want to show my ID. I’ve hard my card stolen and its NOT FUN. Here in CA they usually ask for ID. A lot of clerks have gotten sloppy and don’t ask as much as they used to. They should verify our identity!