And no one in their right mind would deny them. No one who thinks about this for more than 10 seconds as an adult would say someone doesn’t have a right to protect themselves from being a victim of a crime. And I can tell by reading these posts there are some youngin anti corporate types here. Well good luck getting a PC so you can post your rants without em.

Nothing is worse than people who read contracts written by lawyers with loopholes galore and think they are experts. I testify in the cases all the time. I know the rules from the inside I write the risk profiles. I know how it works. The anger should be directed at the scumbag stealing the cards.

Mastercard isn’t losing money, the bank isn’t losing money and the consumer who files the CB isn’t at a loss the merchant is.

MC and Visa are not law makers, all they do is make rules that make it appear they are in the corner of the buyer but they aren’t I work in the industry trust me they don’t give a shit about the individual consumer. So they make the rules but then charge the merchant a fee to accept the card payment and then take away their ability to fight a chargeback.

There was a time when a receipt and signature that matched the signature on the card was enough to fight a CB. Not anymore. So the MC rule means nothing as long as the we refuse the right to refuse service rule applies and you who think MC rules over ride that don’t get how companies work.

It’s safe to say that not everyone understands the reason why Apple would even think to ask. But I can guarantee you that if I were to call ANY of the people whose credit card I prevented from being used in an unauthorized way, they would be thankful.

And for the record, I have colleagues that work for the company and the policy has always been that an employee can ask for ID if the card is unsigned, or if there is strong reason to believe that the card is being used in an unauthorized way (such as the son/daughter coming in with the father/mother’s card) because technically a credit card is not valid unless it is signed, and the signature that is captured matches that on the card.

To the person who complained and found himself all up in arms about being asked for the ID … GET OVER IT. They just want to make sure you’re who you say you are, and the company isn’t sucking up huge chargebacks and in the end raising the cost of doing business because you felt like you were being violated in some way.

Also, the ONLY time I’ve ever had my ID information recorded in their system is when you make a purchase using the educational discount, because the system requires this information for auditing purposes (since you ARE getting a discount) and has nothing to do with the acceptance of your credit card.

Also, to respond to some of the posts above …

First off, American Express specifically notes in their cardholder agreement that only the assigned member may use their cards. I also checked both my Visa and Msastercard agreements for my personal cards and found similar verbiage. Just because you don’t think something is illegal because you see other people do it, doesn’t make it right.

Second … to the guy that talked about giving in to prevent a “small risk” … you’ve obviously never worked in a high ticket retail environment. We are TRAINED to identify fake IDs. Many retailers have a book that contains current and recently replaced state ID designs for all states, and that identifying characteristics of each. If there is a question, it goes to a manager. I’d guarantee you’d be mighty pissed off if your card number was used in one of these theft rings, simply because of the inconvenience surrounding proving you weren’t the ones making the charges, and all of the calls to customer service and fraud departments.

But don’t all of you get up in arms if you have to show your receipt at the door of a store??

Or are you selective about what rights you want and at what time?

Basically, someone tests various business that accept CCs and gets crazy with the signatures. It’s pretty amazing how little attention is given by the cashiers even when it’s a stark difference (crudly-drawn pictures on the slip in place of a signature).

Remember that Apple also has a policy of only selling each person a limited totla number of iphones – because of unlocking and reselling. The drive to record IDs may be part of that.

Here’s the catch-22 on that:
Since they are forced to accept “Ask for ID” as my signature, they are no longer required to ask for ID.

1. Why is the argument not being asserted that it is not the Visa merchant agreement that is at issue but the retailers processing agreement. Why cannot one merely say that Visa would approve the purchase buy the conveyance that actually facilitates the technical sale requires ID be checked and based on that we are declining to process the sale further.
OR
If the retailer really wants to bog things down could they not just call the CC company for voice approval explaining the card holder are unsure of their identity has no ID in possession and putting the cardholder on the line w/ the CC company and get them to approve it directly- then it would be it on the CC company and the retailer would be insulated from a charge-back perhaps? In efficient yes but hey

2. Then there is always this: [www.zug.com]