Visa Officially Says Stores Cannot Deny Purchases If You Don't Show ID

We’ve done a bunch of posts on how it’s a violation of their credit card merchant agreements to ask for additional ID in order to complete a purchase. An IHOP threatened to call the police on one reader when he wouldn’t show additional ID. A Walmart tried to hold a man’s ID and credit card hostage. Debate erupted amongst Consumerist commenters. Like a scythe through ripe wheat, here is an official VISA statement on how stores can’t do this, unless the credit card itself is unsigned:

Merchants may not refuse to honor a Visa card simply because the cardholder refuses a request for supplementary information. The only exception is when a Visa card is unsigned when presented. However, “See ID” is not considered a valid signature. In these situations, a merchant must obtain authorization, review additional identification, and require the cardholder to sign the card before completing a transaction.

To report any merchant practices that you feel are inappropriate, please notify the disputes area at the financial institution that issued your card account. Your card issuing bank has access to the appropriate Visa rules and regulations as well as to the Notification of Customer Complaint forms which should be used by your bank to document and file merchant complaints.

As an alternative, you may contact the Global Customer Care Services to report merchant practices that you feel are inappropriate. Please contact the Global Customer Care Services at 1-800-VISA-911 (1-800-847-2911). Please advise them that you were referred to file a complaint. The staff will be able to initiate a complaint form over the phone.

(Photo: Getty)


Edit Your Comment

  1. AaronC says:

    I believe we all new what their stance was on this… Not really news.

    I think I am more concerned with how/when they will enforce this issue. I have never known a complaint form going very far to initiate a solution. I get the impression the Merchant will get a call from visa and say “tis, tis”.

  2. IphtashuFitz says:

    800-VISA-911. Easy enough to remember. If I’m ever stuck in this situation I’ll request that the merchant call that number. If they refuse I’ll insist that the manager do so. If the manager does then not only have they lost a customer but I’ll call that number right then and there and file a complaint.

  3. My only point is that according to the legal definition of “Signature”, if YOU write “see photo id” on your card, it IS a signature.

  4. mgy says:

    @AaronC: You obviously haven’t been reading the comments. I’d say that a nice fat percentage of readers assume that each merchant has a drastically different contract with VISA and CAN make showing ID a necessary part of a transaction. Then they bitch and moan about how consumerist is posting biased or worthless stories and a flamewar erupts. This post can only help things.

  5. Wormfather says:

    Dear lord, finally, definitivness.

  6. bonzombiekitty says:

    Isn’t this basically the same thing that keeps getting posted every time there’s a thread about this?

    To me, the issue is not about what the merchant agreement says. But whether or not it’s really something to be so freaking upset and paranoid about.

  7. stanfrombrooklyn says:

    Let’s see. Visa gets about 1-3% cut off all credit card sales. In a Wal-Mart store that’s hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for one store alone; do you think Visa is going to do much more than “tsk tsk” if a Wal-Mart store asks you for your i.d. and you call Visa pissed? Of course not.

    Visa, M/C, and Amex pass almost 100% of the risk of credit card fraud to the merchants. Since the merchant is the one that has to pay for fraud, c.c. companies have no incentive to do anything that would hold back credit card usage. If asking for i.d. would hold back fraud but also reduce overall c.c. usage, then the c.c. companies don’t want to ask for i.d.

  8. ChrisC1234 says:

    I don’t see why things like this and showing a receipt at WalMart are such a big deal. Show the damn ID or receipt and be done with it. These people waste more time/effort for lots of people over something that shouldn’t even be an issue. There ARE issues in this world worth making a big deal about. Using a credit card without showing ID is NOT one of them.

  9. Wormfather says:

    …I knew this already but like mgy said, people THOUGHT they knew what they were talking about.

  10. Squeezer99 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave: except if you read the VISA merchant agreement, signing SEE ID, ASK FOR ID, etc is not valid and treat the card as an unsigned card.

  11. stinerman says:


    It doesn’t mean anything though. I’ve filed several complaints for minimum charges and ID requirements and the merchant still won’t budge.

    It’s just another “law on the books” that isn’t enforced. In my city, not clearing your sidewalk of snow at least 3 hours after sunrise is punishable by prison time. It’s the law, but no one ever gets arrested for it.

  12. Wormfather says:


    You my friend are wrong on so many accounts.

    1. The issuers pay fruad, not the merchants. As long as the receipt is signed the merchant is off the hook. Only exception would be if they exceeded the 6% threashold, then they’re screwed for a year.

    2. I’m telling you, both MC and Visa have compliance departments that do nothing but hand out fines for this type of stuff.

    And for the last time, I’m not showing my ID to someone just because they ask, I stopped saying baaaaa a long time ago.

  13. fluiddruid says:

    @ChrisC1234: What if they started scanning the ID and retaining the information? Is it OK to ask for a full name, address, height, weight, picture, phone number, birthdate, etc. for marketing purposes? At what point do we say that this is inappropriate?

    I don’t think I need to show my driver’s license to buy groceries. It’s a stupid policy. I probably would show the ID to get out of there, and then report them.

  14. @Squeezer99: Their agreement can’t override established law, can it? I mean, if they said “x” doesn’t count as a signature, but according to law it does, does that mean Visa wins?

  15. kepler11 says:

    Why do people act like it’s such a god-given right to not have to show ID, just because Visa’s policy says so? If their policy said you have to show ID, would you report merchants for not checking it? Why exactly do people take it upon themselves to enforce Visa’s policy for them?

    Merchants are trying to prevent fraud, to themselves, and to you in case your card is stolen. Why act like this is some huge infringement on privacy? It’s not, and it’s helping both the customer and store, so that fraud isn’t paid for by legitimate customers in the end. Don’t you know that the reason Visa says ID cannot be required, is that they just want CC payments to be as fast as cash? And they’re ok with not having to check ID because they don’t carry the burden of CC fraud — the banks and the stores do?

  16. Dobernala says:

    @Squeezer99: I guess you are screwed if your name happens to be “See Id”.

  17. metaled says:

    Is there a direct link to this information?

    I have a feeling some people may start trying it and will need to write to the stores corporate headquarters. It would be helpful if we had a direct link to the information for reference in those letters instead of pointing the store’s management to go read it on the Consumerist.
    Go Consumerist!

  18. Wormfather says:

    @stinerman: A merchant near my house was reported actually, he charged me like $10.35 for a pack of smokes and a vitamin water (Essential orange baby), happened to look at the receipt and saw a $0.50 charge on there and apparently there’s a $.50 charge for using a CC for an order under $10. I was livid, made a phone call and it doesnt happen anymore.

    I guess it’s a case by case basis.

  19. Wormfather says:

    @kepler11: Yes, yes, yes, that’s just it, I want my CC transaction to be as fast as cash. Oh and I dont feel like giving anyone any information about me.

  20. vividblurry says:

    “‘See ID’ is not considered a valid signature. In these situations, a merchant must obtain authorization, review additional identification, and require the cardholder to sign the card before completing a transaction.”

    Amazing. Is weekend editor Carey going to take back all of those inane “SEE ID!!!” entries she just loves to post?

  21. ztoop says:

    There is one point everyone seems to be missing: you don’t show an ID in order to protect yourself from fraud. Someone can only do only so much if he copies down your CC number, but with your billing address, a mischievous person can make a lot more money.

    In order to avoid a scene, I did give someone my ID when she said the manager required it (for my $1.83 no-signature-required purchase). Upon leaving she was writing something on the receipt. What she wrote, I’ll never know.

  22. johnva says:

    @kepler11: It does not help the customer, because it’s not the customer’s problem if credit card fraud occurs. It’s nothing but a pointless burden and intrusion from the perspective of the customer once you actually take the time to think about whose liability it is. It doesn’t benefit me to show ID, so I don’t want to. And it definitely does slow transactions down. At someplace that doesn’t check IDs, I can use my credit card much faster than cash (my grocery doesn’t make you sign if it’s under $50).

  23. witeowl says:

    You all realize that everyone is just looking out for their own best interests, right? Wal-mart (and other merchants) is just trying to reduce chargeback penalties. Visa (and other creditors) is just trying to maximize card utilization.

    It’s no skin off Visa’s nose if your card gets stolen and used at Wal-mart; Wal-mart will have to eat the loss.

    Are we really that self-centered and short-sighted that we’re willing to pay higher prices just so that we can beat our chests and grunt “privacy” at every opportunity?

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I don’t mind that some merchants ask for ID. I’m grateful for the ultimate lower costs this security measure provides. If you don’t like it, shop elsewhere. That’s your right. At most, expect merchants like Wal-mart to post a notice at the entrance so that you can make your decision before entering the store. But stop screwing with my right to shop somewhere that does ask for ID.

  24. @ChrisC1234: Because it’s a CONTRACT, and the consumer/merchant situation in this country has gotten so that consumers are held to totally unreasonable contracts of adhesion which merchants change with impunity at any moment for any reason. It’s not remotely unreasonable for consumers to hold merchants to contracts EVEN IF IT SEEMS LIKE A SMALL ISSUE.

    And, dude, ID theft? Miss that memo?

  25. stacye says:

    After reading this article and the comments, I can see this finally puts the situation to rest.

  26. @witeowl: “But stop screwing with my right to shop somewhere that does ask for ID.”

    Where exactly is THAT right enumerated?

  27. I had a delivery earlier this week from Pizza Hut. I ordered online, and paid with a credit card.

    The pizza arrived, and the driver wanted to see the credit card. He placed the card on the receipt, and was about to rub his pen over it to imprint the entire credit card number onto the receipt. I stopped him and took my card back. I don’t want my entire card number with expiration date floating around on a receipt that this driver can copy down, or the store can dispose of improperly (not shredded)

    He then wanted to see my licesne (Um, there’s no question about my address, you’re at my house) so I showed him, and he wanted to write down the license number.

    Well, that was it. I had already signed the receipt. I already had my pizza. I told him “no” and closed the door. He lost his tip.

    There’s a gas station near my house that, when you make a purchase with a credit card, they require you to remove your ID from your wallet, hand it to them under the big glass shield, and then they put the license under a black light to confirm it is valid. This is a $5 purchase for coffee and snacks, for crying out loud.

    What’s going to be in 10 years? Will we have to remove a hair from our head so they can perform a DNA test before accepting a credit card?

  28. stacye says:

    @witeowl: I imagine that Visa and Mastercard have this policy so that the merchant, or the person checking you out, does not have to play the police officer, and as such, they are not legally held responsible for fraudulent charges.

    Let’s say Visa comes back tomorrow with a press release that states, “Every merchant must now I.D. every customer who has a Visa card. NO EXCEPTIONS.” Does that now mean as a customer, if my card is used at their location, that I can sue the check out person for someone else stealing my identity? After all, it was their responsibility to check my ID, and obviously that wasn’t me, so obviously they didn’t check it.

  29. johnva says:

    @stacye: It’s not your liability, so I doubt you could sue.

  30. weedpindle says:

    There is no law (unless you VOLUNTARILY present yourself in a situation where it is required – border crossing, airport, bar, etc)that requires anyone to show ID to anyone, including police, unless they are a suspect in a violation of law. A cop can’t ask you for ID just ‘because’, although he can ask you to verbally identify yourself. A merchant has no more rights to than a cop. The credit card company guarantees the payment to the merchant when the card is approved, therefor I won’t show any ID to any merchant. They need my business more than I need them.

  31. Wormfather says:

    @Dooley: Actually, they need to take an imprint of the card to show that it was in fact present at the transaction.

    At the end of the day, you’re screwing you bank. I’m a Bank of Opportunists customer so some days I pray that someone steals my card and charges 10 grand that I’m not going to be responsible for just so Bank of America can eat it.

  32. highmodulus says:

    @Dooley: Nope, the arm tattoo from Idiocracy:


  33. stacye says:

    @johnva: If you charge something on your credit card, are you not responsible for the charges? If a thief charges something on your credit card, are you not responsible for the charges in some way?

    You have to take the action to get the fraudulent charges removed. And after all is said and done, you could possibly be stuck with the charges. Or worse, dings on your credit report.

    If a lawyer could hold a criminal responsible for any death that occurs while he/she commits a crime (even if they did not kill anyone), then certainly one could make a case for liability.

  34. johnva says:

    @witeowl: Some people value privacy more than others. Some people don’t want to show ID purely because they are not required to and the store doesn’t need to see it. Some don’t want to provide another opportunity for identity theft. Some people I know have had problems with stalkers, etc and don’t like revealing their home address to random people. Some people find showing their ID more inconvenient. Some don’t like how corporate America has been expanding the areas they ask us to give up our privacy rights voluntarily, and want to draw a line in the sand. There are plenty of good reasons not to want to show it, and since we are in the right, we have a right to refuse.

    I still don’t understand why anyone would actually WANT to show their ID every time they use their credit card, though. There is little evidence that it would increase security appreciably (thieves would just use stolen credit cards someplace they wouldn’t have to, like pay-at-the-pump or on the Internet). And it’s not your liability if your card is used fraudulently, so you personally don’t directly benefit from showing it. I view it as yet another annoying burden on me that is meant to protect someone else. I’ve got no responsibility to protect VISA or the merchants by giving up my privacy.

    If VISA and the store were really concerned about security, they would upgrade the design of the credit card system to actually provide secure authentication. Here’s the thing: there are FAR more effective means of dealing with fraud than making everyone show ID. They could use smart cards that are hard to duplicate with a chip inside the cards that participates in an active cryptographic authentication protocol (to reduce the ability to clone cards). They could use biometric authentication, which wouldn’t necessarily require you to disclose info like your name or address to the store. They could require all credit cards to use PINs. VISA will do these things if fraud ends up costing them too much money. They don’t right now because it would cost so much money to upgrade all the existing credit card infrastructure. But they will someday, most likely. Since it’s their liability, it’s their decision on when it’s cost effective to roll that kind of thing out.

    In the meantime, we’re stuck with the imperfect system we have. But don’t try to make use give up more privacy under the impression it helps security. It doesn’t.

  35. unklegwar says:

    @AaronC: I think your “k” key is broken.

  36. johnva says:

    @stacye: No, you absolutely ARE NOT responsible for the charges in any way if a thief charges things to your credit card (or rather, your liability is limited to $50, but in practice most credit card companies give 0 liability). This is federal law. Yes, you should report your card stolen immediately if it is (in this post, we seem to be talking exclusively about the physical card being stolen, since that is the only scenario in which this ID checking nonsense could even conceivably help), mainly to save yourself some hassle. But if you report that a transaction is fraudulent, the burden of proof is on the store and the credit card company to prove that it’s not, under the law. I’ve never had any problems getting fraud removed from my accounts.

  37. gnubian says:

    A simple bit of double standard ..

    Go into our local Lowes, buy a few items, use the self checkout with credit card .. no ID required.

    Go to the same Lowes and use a live checker .. be ready to show your ID.

    At Circuit City, bought a power supply to repair a computer, pulled out my Visa to pay for it. Was asked for my ID, declined to give it, manager got involved and gave me a (paraphrased)”we’re required to check IDs on visa cards, it’s a policy between us and visa .. we don’t have to check if you’re using a mastercard though..”

  38. lasereric41 says:

    Personally, I’ve read a bunch of these “don’t show ID” articles, and I don’t get it. Sure, I understand the desire to protect your privacy, but in my mind, when an associate asks me for ID at a store or whatever, I know that they’re just doing their job, and personally I appreciate it! That way we all know that the person using my credit card is me, and I like that, especially since signatures don’t mean a thing since the invention of the pinpad. When I can get away with signing my credit card with a picture of 2 stick figures, I’m pretty relieved when someone asks me for my ID.

    I don’t dispute that there is probably a more effective way of preventing fraud, but for now if showing my ID for 3 seconds helps prevent me from spending 3 weeks trying to get the charges disputed, I’ll do it.

  39. johnva says:

    @lasereric41: Well, here’s the thing. It’s not really going to help reduce fraud if your card is stolen unless EVERYWHERE that takes credit cards requires the ID. And that’s simply not going to happen, especially since it’s against the rules in the first place. Thieves aren’t stupid…they will just figure out how to use the stolen card in a way that won’t require them to show an ID. They will take the path of least resistance.

    And “3 weeks” to get a charge disputed??! Try 5 minutes total every time I’ve had to do that.

  40. Wormfather says:

    @johnva: You are right on…for the most part.

    Visa and Master Card Make the rules. But the banks are their customers. There are two types of banks in this senario (sometimes they’re the same bank)

    The aquierer who more or less covers transactions for the merchants and represents them to MC and Visa.

    The issuer who issues us credit cards and covers us in case of defalt or fraud. If someone steals you card they are on the hook for paying the merchant as long as there was a signature. (Internet, mail order and phone order are a little bit stickier, thus why you always have to give you CVV)

    Now make no mistake about it, wide acceptance is of everyones best interest for different reasons (ie consumers spend more on average with a credit card…more sales for the merchant, more interest for issuer, more interchange fees for the visa/mc.

    But at the end of the day the Issuer holds more power over Visa and MC, they for all intents and purposes dictate the rules to MC/Visa, reason being because they hold the most power in this whole relationship, without them nobody’s pockets get fat. The point I’m trying to make is that the issuers are making money hand over fist via credit cards, then get interest from the cardholder and they get a chunk of the interchange fee from the merchant. And if that wasnt enough there’s .002% fee wraped up in every transaction that’s an assement fee, what type of assesment you ask, risk assesment. The banks see fraud as a minimal problem, if it got to big, then all the changes you talked about would be done in months, instead they’re approving ways of making it easier to use your card.

    Oh and the banks loose much more money to defalted cards than they do to fraud. Still and yet, anyone, regardless of credit rating can still get at least a $500 limit on a credit card. It’s easy money for them.

    Oh one more thing, there is one other senario where the merchant is responsible for the fraud. If it’s internal and they’re stupid enought to admit it.

  41. xamarshahx says:

    Some people are so stupid, I love when they ask for ID, its protecting me and saving me from the hassle of reporting fraud and replacing cards.

  42. Channing says:

    I hope everyone gets thier credit card stolen. Everyone.

  43. viqas says:

    so… if the merchant calls the cops and i get thrown in jail i can call visa and they will make things right?

  44. Skankingmike says:

    listen who cares? Visa isn’t going to do anything about an IHOP and certainly nothing about a Walmart harassing you about ID.

    So give up really if you don’t like it don’t shop at those places.

    I never shop at Walmart but then i have morals.

  45. johnva says:

    @Wormfather: You’re correct. It’s simply a cost-benefit thing for the credit card issuers. They would implement effective security if the benefit of stopping more fraud was worth the cost to them. It’s not, so they haven’t yet. But good background.

    @xamarshahx: Except that it isn’t protecting you much unless every place that takes credit cards does the check.

    @Channing: I have, twice, with two different companies (though it wasn’t my physical card either time). Each time, it was incredibly easy to get the fraud reversed and new cards issued. I truly don’t understand why people think it’s such a big deal to have to report it.

  46. gnubian says:

    @stacye: My wife had her purse stolen from our kitchen table (several years ago) .. It was the credit card companies that notified us of the fraudulent use (MBNA Platinum MasterCard).

    We’ve triggered (several times) credit card company checks just by road tripping and having a drastically alter shopping pattern.

    CC companies actively track usage and usage patterns.

    The first instance I mentioned was detected when $3000 worth of charges were attempted + attempted ATM use in the space of about 20 minutes.

    The second was with my visa debit card when we drove from Salt Lake City -> Reno -> Salt Lake City (about 1000 miles) in a day to pick up a car we were buying. We made so many gas purchases in that short span of time, it triggered the alert.

  47. treesyjo says:

    If someone is so against showing ID, why are they using a card in the first place? Pay with cash. And whatever happened to “My house, my rules”? Don’t like store policy, don’t shop at that store. Problem solved.

  48. Wormfather says:

    @xamarshahx: Um, if your card is stolen, you’re going to have to report it and get a new card eitherway.

  49. kaptainkk says:

    All of you that say it’s no big deal to show your ID when checking out or show a receipt when leaving the store are just sheep. Stand up for what’s right and stop giving in for the sake of convenience.

  50. @gnubian: I miss MBNA. The employees were treated so well, and they kept the customer happy.

  51. Wormfather says:

    @johnva: Its funny, a couple of years ago right before the the sub-prime bust, there was an article in the WSJ stating that the Banks were having problems, basically, consumers were paying their bills too soon, they wernt making enough profit. That’s all changed now, but think about it, they’re biggest problem was people paying their bills. Perspective people.

  52. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:


  53. Lucky225 says:


    Because it is a god given right, it’s called the 4th amendment. Asking me if I have something on me and then forcing me to show it is a violation of civil rights, regardless of weather or not I’m paying Cash or Credit. You people that say just show your ID or pay with Cash are missing the point, why is it NOT okay to ask for ID with Cash, but it IS okay to ask for it with Credit Cards when the Credit Card rules specifically forbid requiring it . Cash rules specifically forbid requiring it, so what happens when they start asking for ID on Cash, are you going to bend over then and tell people just take the 5 seconds to show your ID and get on with it. It shouldn’t matter the MODE OR METHOD OF PAYMENT, it’s not required, I’m not showing it, YOU get over it.

  54. StevenJohn says:

    Ask any business owner, their agreement is with the Merchant Bank and the Merchant Bank [] says you can check ID’s.

  55. Lucky225 says:


    Had this happen w/ pizza hut in California, they had preprinted receipts with DL# spaces. When I sent off a stern letter showing they were in violation of CALIFORNIA LAW, this practice stopped.

  56. Lucky225 says:


    they’re not doing their job, their job is to accept the card, and NOT decline it based on refusal of ID, if they do, they have not done their job, obviously.

  57. Lucky225 says:


    It is not protecting you or saving you from anyone. If your card is missing it is YOUR responsibility to report it stolen. You can’t just assume a merchant is going to ask for ID when it goes missing and pretend like it’s not missing or stolen.

  58. APFPilot says:

    @StevenJohn: You can check ID’s only under specific circumstances according to that. Even then it doesn’t say to make it a condition of sale.

  59. Buran says:

    @Lucky225: I think your caps lock key is broken.

  60. Lucky225 says:




    Master Card Merchant Rules
    7.1.6 Card Acceptance Requirements

    Each Acquirer must ensure that:

    f. a Merchant does not refuse to complete a Transaction solely because a
    Cardholder who has complied with the conditions for presentment of a
    Card at the POI refuses to provide additional identification information,
    except as specifically permitted or required by the Rules;


  61. camille_javal says:

    @kepler11: Why do people act like it’s such a god-given right to not have to show ID, just because Visa’s policy says so?

    Because, in this situation, Visa *is* God.

    I don’t typically have a problem with showing ID; I don’t believe I have a big ID theft issue (my state ID isn’t tied to anything). But I also know contract law, and anyone who doesn’t want to show ID should not have to. Hell, maybe you just don’t want people to know where you live.

    I don’t see why you, and others, get such a bug up your ass about people enforcing a contract. Is it changing anything? No. Is it causing you problems? No. If you think merchants should ask everybody for ID, start petitioning the cc companies.

  62. Lucky225 says:

    (emphasis added) =)

  63. Buran says:

    I don’t give a damn what they think, I can and will continue to say thank you to clerks who check my ID to make sure I am the actual cardholder, and protect me from being victimized in the future, and as a past victim I know all about what it’s like.

  64. t325 says:

    Not this shit again……

  65. ChuckECheese says:

    The thing to do here, is to get your name changed to

    See I. D

    That will work, right?

  66. CaptainRoin says:

    Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor safety. – Ben Franklin

    It all has to start somewhere. Today ID’s tomorrow something else. STFU and protect your rights by enforcing them.

  67. Lucky225 says:


    For real


    Wait until Real ID goes into effect, these people don’t even know what their ID is, they’ll continue pretending it’s just a laminated piece of plastic/pvc with a photo.

  68. Yoooder says:

    Does this same policy apply to MasterCard as well?

  69. Lucky225 says:



    And here’s where to report MasterCard merchants in violation of said policy:


  70. Buran says:

    @mgy: And it’s a very valid point. You DON’T know what the individual contract is and it’s awful arrogant to assume that everyone’s is the same. This statement, too, is general and can be overridden by individual contracts.

    I’m staying out of the flamewars over this, though I do post my stance but I really have better things to do than come back in here over and over and scream and raise a fuss and try to get everyone to bow down to me — it ain’t gonna happen; been there, done that, and I’m through with that sort of thing.

    Besides, the flame wars are over the same damn topics every single time. Can’t we find something new to have flamewars over?

  71. Witera33it says:

    As a merchant, I can tell you that I will be eating fraudulent charges. It has happened before, and I for one will do my damnedest to protect myself. I work in a business where I already have to ID, (I am a Tattoo Artist) and if the service is being paid by someone else, I will ask for their ID as well.

    @Lucky225: The 4th amendment protects us against illegal search and seizure. Asking for ID is not an act of illegal search and seizure. This amendment protects us from the government forcibly entering your property and taking information. There must be a warrant. Checking ID does not fall into that category.

  72. ryanv1978 says:

    Here we go again…more people who have time to waste just so they can make a cashier feel stupid while they talk about contracts.

    Visa might say this is the policy, but i gurantee you nothing happens to the merchants who violate this contract. Visa and MC want their cut, and they really could care less. Watch.

  73. Lucky225 says:


    Your point is invalid, because the customer can Assume that the individual contract between the merchant and the merchant bank is correct since the merchant bank it’s self has contractual agreements with MasterCard, and MasterCard’s rules clearly state the Merchant Bank *MUST* make sure the Merchant ALSO doesn’t violate MasterCard’s rules:

    Master Card Merchant Rules
    7.1.6 Card Acceptance Requirements

    Each Acquirer must ensure that:

    f. a Merchant does not refuse to complete a Transaction solely because a
    Cardholder who has complied with the conditions for presentment of a
    Card at the POI refuses to provide additional identification information,
    except as specifically permitted or required by the Rules;

  74. Lucky225 says:


    You don’t like the rules, don’t accept the card.

  75. LibertyReign says:



  76. Lucky225 says:


    Amendment 4:

    The RIGHT of the people to be SECURE in their persons, houses, PAPERS, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    This is a RIGHT, and does not only apply to unwarranted actions of government, but unwarranted actions of anyone violating the right of the person to be secure in their persons, houses, PAPERS, etc..

  77. LibertyReign says:


    “Why do people act like it’s such a god-given right to not have to show ID, just because Visa’s policy says so?”

    Actually its because the law says its so. It’s in the Constitution that the creator has endowed me with certain unalienable rights. One of them is that I don’t have to show my I.D. to anyone if I don’t want to. It’s a divine right which is pretty fundamental to a free society. If you paid any attention in history class you would understand this.

  78. @Lucky225: Where to begin? Are you implying that the 4th Amendment encompasses credit card ID issues? Are you telling us that the 4th Amendment is a God-given right? Do you have any idea what you’re talking about?

    Man, I’m not one to flame, but I’m so tired of the empty-headed drivel that gets poured out in these forums when we discuss showing ID/receipts at a point of sale. I’m now less inclined to blame the tin-foil-cap paranoids who make a crusade out of this issue as I am to blame Consumerist for continuing to give this “issue” so much attention. Why is this such a big deal???

  79. ryanv1978 says:


    People like Lucky don’t care about you. They don’t care that you end up eating fraud charges and it’s comes from your pocket. They don’t care that you are only trying to do what is right and protect yourself and your livelihood.

    They care only about themselves and think the world is out to screw them. They think they are patriots standing up for civil rights and making the world a better place.

    Meanwhile, you and your business get screwed because you couldn’t confirm that the presenter and card holder are 1 in the same.

    To put it simple, they have no perspective because they don’t live in the real world. They live in a world of litagation, nit picking over meaningless BS.

    I’d like to see a merchant have their account pulled for asking for ID, I am willing to bet it would NEVER happen, which goes to show you just how much Visa or MC actually care about this issue. They care about making money..PERIOD.

  80. LibertyReign says:


    THe 4th amendment is a god-given right. It says so on the same page..

    Jesus Christ what is wrong with you people???

  81. LibertyReign says:


    No one eats fraud charges from not showing I.D.

    THe idea that because I am secure in my papers means there is rampant fraud every 10 seconds is just the kind of fascist bullshit that the government puts on the news everyday. The sky is not going to fall because I adhere to my GOD GIVEN rights.

  82. ryanv1978 says:


    that’s fine….you also don’t have to use your CC, that is NOT a right you have. The store owner could ask you to leave his place of business for virtually any reason he wants. So go ahead and get in a pointless pissing match.

    People trying to make this into a civil liberties issue miss the point entirely.

    Your not a jew, and this isn’t Germany, don’t pretend or even insinuate that you are one.

  83. ryanv1978 says:


    there is a merchant above who told us all that he does IN FACT eat the charges.

    So please…stand corrected.

  84. Lucky225 says:


    The Bill of Rights is just that: rights, not privileges and no federal or state agency can violate our rights as reaffirmed by the Bill of Rights. These are rights we are all born with, no government gave them to us nor can they take them away. These precious tenets are the very foundation of our Republic. In Miller v. U.S., 230 F., 2nd 286, 489 the court said: “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime.”

  85. LibertyReign says:


    I have already found myself saying this but again:

    Im not sure which is worse..

    The fact that you are so ignorant about your rights and their importance, or that you ar emocking someone who is smarter than you.

    Now knowing your frackin’ rights makes you a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist. You are sad pathetic individual, and I use the term indicidual lightly.

  86. ryanv1978 says:


    Lucky has NO idea what he is talking about. He has shown this many times…but the most glaring is when he cited the 4th amendment….which is so comical i just spit coffee all over my scree.

  87. LibertyReign says:


    Fraud is not caused by my 4th amendment rights. Now please, sit in silence.

  88. LibertyReign says:


    Yeah its funny when American citizens cite their own rights when it’s applicable to their situation.


  89. ryanv1978 says:


    Go ahead an file a court case and say your civil rights were violated by asking for ID.

    Watch how fast the judge tosses your case from court. Seriously.

    You can waste your own time all you want…but the judges and the courts….they won’t stand for you non-sense.

  90. Shevek says:

    Another concern about showing ID: Don’t some state driver’s licenses still show social security numbers (mine does not)? If so, I’d be wary of flashing it to anyone, too. And my license still has other personal info that I’d rather not just give to anyone.

    I’m glad for this post because it finally (hopefully) gives me something to point to when arguing with merchants.

  91. @Lucky225: If I am correct, and I have countless law and order episodes to back me up, but the 4th amendment only covers government agencies, be they local or federal. Private Investigators can do more than a cop. Your employer can go through your “effects”, and fire you based on the contents. Hell, a school can search a students PRIVATE backpack.

    Do you also believe that the “Separation of Church and State” is in the Constitution?

  92. ryanv1978 says:


    I will not sit in silence. Read the post.

    CC pass off fraud charges off to the merchant quiet often, I know that it has happened in my business, and here we have another business who i claiming the same thing.

  93. ryanv1978 says:


    If your state still puts your SS# on your DL then someone needs to make a call to their state rep. I can’t imagine there are any states that still make this practice.

  94. johnva says:

    @ryanv1978: Look, it’s not that I don’t care about merchants getting screwed over by credit card fraud. I’m sure it happens, and I do think it’s a problem that results in increased prices on goods and services for everyone. I just don’t think it’s *my* responsibility as a mere cardholder to deal with preventing fraud, and the law is on my side. I’m not even in a position to do much of anything that would actually be effective in preventing fraud (checking ID is next to useless as a security measure, and I suspect it’s done mainly because it makes a lot of people feel better about security rather than because it actually works). It is VISA, the banks’, and the merchants responsibility to build a better, more secure system for payments if fraud is such a problem, not mine. They don’t think it’s that big of a problem for them, since they haven’t done this. If the merchants are really upset about this, instead of hassling their customers with ineffective security measures they should spend their energy trying to push for more secure payment systems with real authentication technology from VISA. And be willing to foot part of the bill for the equipment upgrades that are part of that. The real problem that enables fraud is that the credit card system is an antiquated legacy system, not that people aren’t showing ID.

  95. LibertyReign says:


    Thats the difference between us ryan. You are a pathetic slave who thinks his rights and mor eimportantly EVERYONE ELSE’S RIGHTS are “pointless”.

    I think they are the most important thing on God’s green Earth, and ones of the reasons I use my CC is so I don’t have to show I.D.

    Jews have nothing to do with fascism. The Nazis also gassed and executed, political dissedents, the mental retarded, the poor, socialists, POWs and his own people who attempted to oppose him. Just as in the last thread you resort to racism and bigotry in an attempt to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Do you know WHY you do this? It’s because your argument is full of crap.

  96. Orv says:

    @Lucky225: The 4th Amendment says the government can’t search your property unnecessarily. It doesn’t say that a private business has to follow your rules when you choose to do business with them.

  97. ryanv1978 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:


    He doesn’t understand things like this.

  98. LibertyReign says:


    and fraud is still irrelevant to:

    a. My rights to not carry papers and to be secure at all times from everyone from unreasonable search

    b. the fact that a merchant is REQUIRED by contract to accept my payment without I.D.

    You can bark all you want you will still be wrong. I was just offering you the chance to stop yourself from removing all doubt that you have a poor capacity for logic.

  99. Lucky225 says:


    No *YOU* have no idea what you’re talking about, which you have shown in your repeated circular logic posts that do not support in any way that a merchant can legally violate his contract. The fact that a merchant can not legally violate their contract is reason enough they can not require ID, no further reason or explanation that suits YOU, is required from the customer to refuse ID, period. Since the merchant has a legal obligation to accept the card and can not rely on refusal to show id as the SOLE reason to decline the customer, there is no reason needed from the customer, other then the fact they don’t want to show ID. So be a good little sheep and show your id, give your retinal scan and fingerprints with your credit card transactions, while the rest of us demand our rights, simply because we refuse to give them up.

  100. Wormfather says:

    @StevenJohn: Guess which aggreement supercedes that. Go ahead, guess. In that contract that you sign with BoA or Chase or any other bank, there’s a clause that specifies that the rules and by laws of Visa & MC reign supreme.

  101. LibertyReign says:


    Actually the 4th amendment says nothing about THE GOVERNMENT, and the RULES ARE THAT THE COMPANY MUST TAKE PAYMENT WITHOUT DEMANDING I.D.

    Please.. let us not forget that people like ryan are full of shit when they are full of shit..

    The contract states that I.D. shall not be required…

    Let us not forgot that is how this all started..

  102. johnva says:

    @Orv: The private businesses HAVE agreed not to make ID checks a condition of using a credit card, however. They have voluntarily waived some of their rights to arbitrarily refuse to do business with some of their customers on this grounds. They signed the contract, hence they can’t refuse to do business with you for that reason alone, even if they would have been able to had they not signed the contract.

    I agree though, the 4th Amendment is irrelevant to this.

  103. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    Private investigators do not have more powers then police!!! They don’t have more power then a private citizen, they only have a license to do business in that field, that is all. They can’t go and break into your house! Wow people are really unaware of their rights these days. As far as employers and schools, you consent to those things prior to employment or enrollment in school. I did not give any consent when I entered IHOP for them to search my person, if such consent was required, I would have went elsewhere.

  104. Wormfather says:

    @Buran: You can say thank you all you like, but in the end, I promise you, it’s not changing anything.

  105. ryanv1978 says:


    where did i resort to racism and bigotry? Those are baseless accusations.

    Lucky is the one who compared being asked for an ID to being treated like a jew in WWII Germany. He did it more than once in fact.

    Get your facts straight.

  106. Buran says:

    @Lucky225: Excuse me, but I believe it’s perfectly valid. It has already been posted in one of the prior bitchfests over this issue that the generic rules listed on the websites can be overridden by specific contracts. I don’t feel like finding the post, but knock yourself out.

  107. Buran says:

    @Wormfather: Really. The places that do this (and get thanked by me) still do it. And still get thanked.

  108. Lucky225 says:


    You want your history listen:

    In Nazi Germany (July 1938), only a few months before Kristallnacht (i.e., the night of the broken glass) in which Jewish businesses were targeted by the infamous “Brown Shirts” for destruction, the notorious “J-stamp” was introduced on national ID cards and then later on passports. The use of the “J-stamp” ID cards by Nazi Germany preceded the yellow Star of David badges which led to the subsequent deportation of Gypsies, Jews, homosexuals and political dissidents to the infamous Nazi death camps. In Norway, where yellow cloth badges were not introduced, the J stamped ID card was used in the identification of more than 800 Jews deported to death camps in Eastern Europe.

    Where does the line get drawn? When ID is required for cash? When Cash has RFID’s in them and they are scanned with ID to make sure the CASH is yours? When payment is only accepted based on citizenship? If you don’t stand up now, you’ll continue to bend over in the future, cus it’s only 5 seconds right?

  109. ryanv1978 says:


    right like i said, you don’t give a crap about the merchant so why should THEY give a crap about YOU?

  110. Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg says:

    @ryanv1978: Meanwhile, you and your business get screwed because you couldn’t confirm that the presenter and card holder are 1 in the same.

    Good lord, how many times do you have to have this explained to you? The business has a simple way to confirm that the presenter and card holder are “1 and the same” – match the signature on the card to the signature on the receipt. simple, quick, easy.

    Every single retailer who accepts Visa cards has already agreed that this is acceptable as the only method of verification they may use (absent a suspicion of fraud), because it’s one of the terms they have to agree to in in advance, in order to participate.

    1) Visa:”If you want to accept Visa, you must not make ID a condition of the sale”
    2) Merchant: “Yeah yeah, OK, whatever”
    3) Visa: “Merchants can’t require ID as a condition of the sale, oh valued customers!”
    4) Merchant requires ID anyway, violating its agreement with Visa, inconveniencing the customer, and exposing them to a very real, albeit small, risk of identity theft.

    In your world, the customer who balks at this is “nit picking over meaningless BS”?

    You know, it’s been explained in this thread several times, at length, that a merchant who follows the Visa operating procedures bears little or no liability for fraudulent charges, yet you continue with inflammatory (and patently untrue) lines like “They don’t care that you end up eating fraud charges and it’s comes from your pocket”?

    You are either remarkably obtuse, or are simply trolling. Either way, I’ll not fan the flames further.

  111. ryanv1978 says:


    I don’t need a history lesson from you. You’ve already proven on numerous occasions that you are NOT very educated.

    Heck you couldn’t figure out your caps lock was on.

  112. LibertyReign says:


    It is you who makes the repeated comparison. The comparison was the demand for government issued documents to travel/make purchases/etc.

    You are the only one who keeps bringing up Jews. Its a tired, baseless argument which only shows how little evidence/experience/intelligence you have to back up YOUR argument.

  113. ryanv1978 says:


    and it’s less than 5 seconds….it more like 1 or 2….

    and once again…you comparing being asked for an ID, to the situation you described above…is laughable at best.

  114. LibertyReign says:


    I AM a merchant. Your arguments are completely unrelated to the topic. Demanding I.D.

    Again you reach for something which is:

    a. incorrect

    b. invalid

    c. irrelevant

    Time for another jew comment..

  115. LibertyReign says:


    AMEN again..

    Man it’s difficult keeping ryan’s bullshit in check isn’t it?

    It’s so much easier and quicker to argue when you talk out of your ass and make up reality as you go along..

  116. Lucky225 says:


    Oh I’m sorry, did you not know about the J-stamp? Did you not know citizenship status will be shown on REAL IDs and encoded in RFID chips in these IDs that can be read from a distance while it is simply on your person? What next, should an M/V stamp be put on my ID to verify that I’m actually a mastercard/visa customer so the poor merchant knows I’m good for it?

  117. ryanv1978 says:


    Lucky brought up the Jews more than once. It’s insulting to me as someone who is Jewish and lost family members during that awful time.

    When you want to get a lesson in Jewish history let me know.

  118. LibertyReign says:

    BTW that was a sarcastic attempt to get you to explain just one single time how keeping my I.D. in my pocket screws merchants out of their livelyhood.

    We are all still waiting.. Two days, dozens of comments and you have still yet to explain how that works..BUT we HAVE determined that Lucky and I are not Jewish…


  119. ryanv1978 says:


    CC companies many times pass the fraud off on the merchant. They do not always eat the charges as you like to claim.

    I have explained this numerous times….perhaps you can’t read? Other merchants have explained this as well.

    Have fun living in paranoia that the world is out to get you. You people are silly and don’t live in the real world.

    I’m glad that I was born with common sense and street smarts. Clearly you were not.

  120. ryanv1978 says:

    and i have yet to hear any reasonable explanation on why you can’t take your ID out of your pocket other than “I dont have to”

    that’s like a parent telling a kid “because I said so” Are you that type of parent?

  121. CaptainRoin says:

    @Buran: Where do you shop that employs people trained in identifying fake ID’s correctly?

    How many people have, or know someone who has, gotten into a bar with a fake ID. It’s not that hard. Driver’s License is _not_ a secure form of identification.

    The point isn’t about how much time it takes, the point is that checking is security theater similar to TSA’s charade at the airport. It’s lulling people into a _false_ sense of security.

  122. Orv says:

    @LibertyReign: It says nothing about the government, but the whole purpose of the Constitution is to limit government power. It doesn’t bind private individuals. Just because the constitution says there’s freedom of religion doesn’t mean I have to let a Jehova’s Witness into my house. Just because there’s freedom of the press doesn’t mean the local newspaper is required to print my letter to the editor.

    There may be reasons they shouldn’t be doing ID checks, but the 4th Amendment isn’t one of them.

  123. @Lucky225: I did not say they have more power, only that they can DO more than the police can. There are situations where a police officer would need a warrant where a PI wouldn’t and it would hold up in court, as long as the PI was not working FOR the police, or upon their behalf.

    And correct me if I am wrong, but I can think of a few cases off the top of my head where the ACLU has fought school searches. How could they if they were previously consented to according to you?

  124. Lucky225 says:


    The merchant is the one living in fear and paranoia, they’re the ones asking everyone for their papers — AND STILL GETTING CHARGEBACKS AND FRAUD. *WHY*? Because that’s the cost of doing business. People that are refusing to show ID aren’t doing it because they’re in participation of some uber fraudulent credit card scheme. No one’s asking for the clerk’s ID to make sure they name on their name tag matches the name on their ID and make sure they actually work there. So who’s more paranoid? The clerk or the customer?

  125. algormortis says:

    i’ve learned that if i’m not in a mood to fight it, it’s way easier to flash my passport, which doesn’t even have my damn name in Romaji in it but it has a six-year-old picture of me when i was in grad school and had cellophane blue hair. (hint: my credit card has a Westernized version of my name in pretty roman characters…)

    and yet, they take that every time. go fig. maybe they can all read kanji.

  126. Orv says:

    @Git Em SteveDave: Public schools are arms of the government and there are limitations on what they can do, as a result. (It gets complicated because children do not have all the same legal rights that adults do.)

  127. LibertyReign says:


    Its been explained to you for days, but if you ar etoo slow to comprehend, I recomend you check the founding father’s opinions on the matter.

    Start with the Federalist Papers

  128. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    Parents consent to searches of their children, it’s in the rules of conduct with the school. They also consent to dress codes(which have also been 1st amendment challenged). If the parent doesn’t want to consent they can do home schooling.

  129. ryanv1978 says:


    what does the clerks name have to do with fraud? You make awful points.

    It’s fine, clearly you are not a business man and never will be. Clearly you think sticking it to “the man” if you will is the cool thing to do.

    You don’t care about anyone other than yourself. It’s a crappy way to live.

  130. johnva says:

    @ryanv1978: I listed a bunch of possible reasons in a post above. You seem remarkably offended that people won’t just “go along” with whatever arbitrary rules merchants want to impose.

  131. Wormfather says:

    @Lucky225: I dont think this really falls under the constitution, unless, the merchant calls the police and the police then demand to see your id, but then it’s probably still not a constitutional matter because he was doing an investigation. Now if he comes, you show your ID and he throws you in jail for not showing it in the first place…Now you’ve got a case.

    My point, lets not go over the deep end, a basic understanding of contractual law is all that it takes to end this argument. The issuer contract refers to the bylaws of MC and Visa and they say I’m not required to show my ID…regardless of what the merchant thinks* their contract says.

    Thinks =/= always include or imply actual thought.

  132. ryanv1978 says:

    Hey it’s fine guys.

    Keep fighting useless battles. Keep protecting your info from the man behind the register.

    The merchant lives in paranoia of being ripped off because people don’t give a fuck about, much like you don’t give a fuck about him.

    Now if they were recording your info, that’s one thing…i would never stand for that….but no harm can come from flashing an ID. It’s a joke to insinuate that it could. Show me a documented case of ID theft originating from showing ID during a credit card purchase. I dare you.

  133. @Lucky225: So again, how/why would the ACLU be fighting on behalf of students re:searches? If they had no leg to stand on, it would be useless.

  134. LibertyReign says:





  135. LibertyReign says:


    actually there was one on the local news less than a week ago LOL. It is so rampant investigators have a special term for it. “it” being a criminal stealing someone’s identity from merely glancing at their info. You are teh loose

  136. LibertyReign says:

    Oh and I forgot that the argument that it goes beyond a question of identity thefy is irrelevant because we are “not Jewish”

  137. Lucky225 says:


    There’s nothing requiring me to show the police ID either. Just identify myself verbally, so if I was thrown in jail, I’d have a case either way. As pointed out previously (but beyond the grasps of people who claim to goto OR hearings on monday mornings) this is more about a case of contractual law, but apparently people seem to think violating a contract, which violation effects the customers ability to purchase(regardless of weather or not they have the ID on them) is a very real and valid point, and the argument to just show it, has no merit as there is nothing *WRONG* without showing it, or not having it in the first place.

  138. Wormfather says:

    @ryanv1978: “CC companies many times pass the fraud off on the merchant. They do not always eat the charges as you like to claim.”

    I am the Audit Analyst for a $180M a year company. One of my responsibilities is handling all ou chargeback inquiries.

    In the event of fraud there are only a few ways that we actually end up eating the costs.

    1. It was internal and I admitted to it.
    2. We didnt get a signature on the transaction (not necisarily the customer’s signature, just a signature)
    3. I didnt get my reply in on time.

    90% of the time a face to face merchant pays for fraud, it’s because they were too lazy to reply to the MANDATORY inquery requesing signed authorization.

  139. donkeyjote says:

    @Git Em SteveDave: Wouldn’t that just be a legal signature if your name is “see photo id”…

    Plus, that established law regarding signatures only works if you take it to court. In a private dealing, unless both people agree without being forced to by a judge, they can decide what constitutes a valid signature.

  140. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    I’m not the ACLU, you’d have to address them.

  141. Wormfather says:

    @Lucky225: “The merchant is the one living in fear and paranoia, they’re the ones asking everyone for their papers — AND STILL GETTING CHARGEBACKS AND FRAUD. *WHY*? Because that’s the cost of doing business. People that are refusing to show ID aren’t doing it because they’re in participation of some uber fraudulent credit card scheme. No one’s asking for the clerk’s ID to make sure they name on their name tag matches the name on their ID and make sure they actually work there. So who’s more paranoid? The clerk or the customer?”

    Althought I didnt aggree with you earlier on the 4th amendment stuff, what you just dide…THAT. WAS. HOT!

  142. ryanv1978 says:


    Link or you made it up.

  143. ryanv1978 says:


    and listen…drop the Jew thing. It was lucky who compared an IHOP waitress asking for ID to Jews in Germany.

    It wasn’t me. I was far from the only person who was offended by it. I am jewish, and that offends me to make the two equal because they are not even close.

    The day the IHOP waitress takes you in the back and puts you in the oven is the day it’s the same.

    Lucky stopped making the reference because he knows it makes no sense and is offensive. But he did say it, and he did mean it, and it IS laughable.

  144. Buran says:

    @CaptainRoin: I’m not going to say, because I enjoy protection against being re-victimized, and it doesn’t take hardly any skill to check the name on my ID against the name on my card and against my appearance to see if the photo looks like me or shows how I could have looked in the recent past.

  145. esd2020 says:

    Doesn’t really change anything. This is a rule between Visa and the merchant.

    The worst you can do is threaten to complain to Visa about them. It’s not like you can call the Visa Merchant Agreement Police to get back the card they’re holding hostage.

  146. consumerd says:

    See on the back of all my cards in the signature line I put “Ask for ID” and I get quite a few that don’t, but get just as many that do!

    Now when I pay in cash, no I have hardly ever been asked for my ID, short of purchasing shells for my shotgun. Which I expected my ID to be asked for there as well as any guns I buy. I expect that to happen though.

  147. Lucky225 says:


    I think he’s talking about “shoulder surfing” which has been used by people to record credit/debit card numbers and their pins (these people only need a few seconds and memorize the entire 16 digit number, exp date and a 4 digit pin, but I guess it’s not a reality even though it’s IN THE NEWS — LINK: []
    In reality, customers are in an extremely strong position, with almost all rights on their side. Banks are perfectly well aware that fraud exists, so don’t be fobbed off by fatuous assertions to the contrary. Cases of shoulder surfing, where someone watches you tapping in your pin and then “borrows” the card are well-documented. So are instances where the data is copied and used to produce “cloned” magnetic stripe cards. However, cloned cards can only be used abroad, and the banks don’t accept the “chip” technology has been compromised.

    Shoulder surfing is also used to memorize calling card number pins (and their dial in phone numbers), but apparently the fact that someone might shoulder surf your ID/DL is beyond your comprehension.

  148. ekdikeo says:

    Did anyone think this is a secret?

  149. LibertyReign says:

    re: any evidence of a merchant losing money solely as a result of a customer refusing to show I.D.

    link or you made it up

    By the way you can type identity theft into google and get a page of results which will explain the different types of identity theft and how they occur. Obviously glancing at someone’s info and memorizing it without actually having it in your posession is one of the methods on every single website discussing identity theft. It’s called “shoulder surfing” or “shoulder gleaning” or “gleaning”.

    I suppose the FBI is just “paranoid” and they “made it up” that people steal your info at checkout lines and at the bank. You are such a joke..

    You can’t be serious..

  150. Lucky225 says:


    I don’t keep bringing it up, you do. I brought it up once to make my point highlighted, and I am not going to take it back. I was held against my will and detained while police were called for my refusal to show ID. If we don’t stand up for our rights, they will be stripped from us in silence.

  151. LibertyReign says:


    I have been following since the original thread. The reference was to being demanded to repsent your papers on demand. You are the one who harps on Jews. Somehow the idea of opressing people by forcing public documentation of there every move becomes inapplicable if you aren’t Jewish. Your argument is absurd and I will continue to point that out.

    I would like to take this opportunity to relate to you as an individual now as we NOW finally know where you draw the line.

    Being forced to show your government papers: OK

    Being accused of committing a crime and threatened with arrest: OK

    Being detained while the police who are sworn to protect you are enroute to violate your god-given rights and take away your freedom for something you have ZERO guilt of: OK

    Being burned in an oven: not OK

    Well ok… at least you draw the line SOMEWHERE..


  152. Lucky225 says:


    Also, I never brought up jews, just compared ID checking to Nazi Germany’s Fascist policies.

  153. ryanv1978 says:

    being asked for an ID is not being accused of a crime.

  154. diamondmaster1 says:


    It’s a common misconception on the part of the public that a merchant will get their money if the purchase is approved.

    Don’t believe me? I can introduce you to merchants across the US who followed every procedure and got a valid authorization–and still got a chargeback from the CC company because of a fraudulent/stolen CC.

    As for this paranoid business of not showing an ID–what exactly are people afraid of? Unless the person in front of you has incredible powers of observation and memory, the ONLY thing they are looking for is if the name matches the one on the card. They are simply making sure that the card you presented is in fact YOURS–and not one that your kid swiped out of your wallet to splurge with for example.

  155. LibertyReign says:


    RTFA. He was detained and the police were called for Dine and Dash. Sheesh..can you be correct about ANYTHING at ANY time..just one single correct argument, please???

  156. @Lucky225: You’re also not the Founding Fathers, but you speak for them.

  157. @donkeyjote: So a business can turn down someone if their signature isn’t to their liking? If someone signs the back of their card w/ an “X” b/c they are illeterate, then a store owner has the right to discriminate against them, and he would have to go to court? The established card holder agreement only works in a court also if we go by your reasoning. It’s a legal issue, so it shouldn’t have application in the non-legal world?

  158. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    I quoted the 4th amendment in it’s entirety as it is printed on the constitution, that is hardly speaking on behalf of anyone. Further for your reading:

    “The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statue must be in agreement with it to be valid. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail over the other. The Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, (2nd ed., Section 256), states:

    “The general rule is that an unconstitutional statue, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.” Dr. Jacques S. Jaikaran, author of Debt Virus

    So just because the Patriot Act and Real ID Act were passed does not make it legal. Perhaps the ACLU did have a leg to stand on, I don’t know that is not the issue at hand here. Court rulings also do not override the Constitution as it is the supreme law of the land.

    But as pointed out the 4th amendment isn’t even what is at issue here, the merchant is taking it upon the liberty of themselves to violate their own contractual agreements which restrict requiring ID in the first place, so it really doesn’t even matter.

  159. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    I agree with you that See ID can be a signature, but the merchant agreement also says to compare signatures, so you must sign the receipt as See ID as well, as that is the AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE(look at your card below the signature line it will say “AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE — NOT VALID UNLESS SIGNED”)

  160. @Lucky225: So then “See ID” IS valid, as long as I sign my receipt that way. I have no problem with that.

  161. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    Yea, I made comment in a previous post about a friend of mine who had Lesbian Crackwhore as a signature, even had it on their ID. The store wanted to give them a problem when they signed their receipt that way, asked to see the card again, then said it wasn’t a signature, he recited the Statute for his State and volunteered ID when demanded to show that it was his usual signature as it was even on his ID.

  162. Lucky225 says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    Also regarding signatures:


    (b) Subject to definitions contained in other chapters of
    this title that apply to particular chapters or parts thereof:

    (37) “Signed” includes using any symbol executed or
    adopted with present intention to adopt or accept a writing.

    (41) “Unauthorized signature” means a signature made
    without actual, implied, or apparent authority. The term includes
    a forgery.

  163. Lucky225 says:


    That’s Uniform Commercial Code, so should apply to any state that adopted UCC

  164. Mary says:

    @bonzombiekitty: I’m with you.

    It’s fine that you can get all up in arms about this if you want to, but honestly, is it worth caring about? I say no.

  165. dantsea says:

    MmmmMMM! Smell that astroturf!

  166. LibertyReign says:

    I have asked this three times now:

    When do YOU start caring?

    No sarcasm implied. I would honestly appreciate an answer from anyone who says you shouldn’t care about “small” things. At what point do YOU draw the line? When has a violation of law, contract, and individual liberty become too much for YOU to bare? I am genuinely interested in your response.

  167. stopNgoBeau says:

    @kepler11: Because it is a God given right, you jack ass.

  168. thalia says:

    So you can write “See ID” on the back of your card and them bitch them out for asking for ID? Damn.

  169. Lucky225 says:


    See ID is not a signature, unless you intend it be one. If you intend it to be a signature, they still can’t require it for the transaction as they are only to compare the signature. Secondly, an online merchant or self-serv(gas stations, red box movie rentals, etc.) aren’t going to see the See ID anyways.

  170. whuffo says:

    OK – Fraud is a problem; not as big a problem as some would have you believe, but it’s a problem.

    For a credit card company, it’s one of the risks of doing business. It’s one of the expenses that gets deducted from their revenues. They try to control these losses in various ways – including penalizing merchants who have “excessive” fraud complaints.

    What these credit card corporations do is make money on the difference between their costs and their revenues, just like the merchants do. Fraudulent charges are “normally” absorbed by the credit card company but if the merchant didn’t follow the rules and policies they can be stuck with the loss instead.

    Once again, it’s just one of the risks of doing business. Just because a creative manager type decides that transferring some of the costs / risks to their customers is a good idea doesn’t mean that it’s right, legal, or in compliance with the rules and policies they agreed to.

    Back to those merchants that are asking for ID – they’ve got two reasons for doing this. One is to try to cut down on fraud (but this really doesn’t help) – and the other reason is to collect information that they can use to fill out customer profiles. Those profiles are a profit center, one that doesn’t get talked about much but one that’s mined every day at any major retailer. You have a business relationship with that company, so they can use your information any way they want to.

  171. t325 says:

    @Lucky225: Yes, FEDERAL OR STATE AGENCY! A retail store is neither a federal or state agency and can do as they please.

  172. Lucky225 says:


    Yes I know, be a good a little slave and “choose” where shop, and if you don’t like a “private” store’s policies, even if they are in violation of a legally binding contract, take your business elsewhere, even if “elsewhere” enforces the same illegal policies. Please spare yourself embarrassment in front of the other slaves and do as you are told or go home. Don’t ask questions when they start putting rfid’s in money and then start scanning your money and asking for ID to make sure you were issued that money from your bank account and are entitled to it, be a good little slave and take the 5 seconds to flip out your ID and spare the other slaves their precious time. There’s no big deal here, no line in the sand, just bend over for everywhere you shop.

  173. Lucky225 says:


    Credit Card fraud scam involves fake IDs to make purchases^


    Register your Texas DL to gain entry to Rockets^ (no we don’t have any reason to protect or DL info^)


    Doctor’s wallet gets stolen, thankful her current address wasn’t on it.

    No no reason to protect information printed on your ID, go back to sleep America.

  174. ryanv1978 says:


    just the numerous merchants that have told you already that merchants do in fact end up eating the chargebacks. I’m far from the only one…read the comments.

  175. ryanv1978 says:

    RFID’s would be useless in cash, what a silly argument.

    Cash has no definitive owner, it can exchange hands at any point.

    Credit cards do have a rightful owner, and I see no problem with making sure that owner is in fact the person who is using them.

  176. Mary says:

    @LibertyReign: When I can no longer see and completely understand the reasoning behind the decision, or the inconvenience to me outweighs the convenience to them.

    In other words, this particular issue, I prefer they check a photo ID (where they can get no more information than my name, my social isn’t on my ID card, my address is currently wrong on the printed card, so what are they going to find out, I’m an organ donor?) This does not present a security threat TO me, and does prevent one, so I’m fine with it.

    I’m fine with receipt checking depending on the attitude and method.

    The line for me is drawn pretty clearly at “Something simple that protects both me and the merchant.” Both of these practices do that.

    If they asked for my passport or wanted me to fill out an I9, yes I’d have a problem. If I got pulled over and was told to prove my citizenship (as some counties in Virginia are doing now) I would have a problem.

    But showing my ID when I check out at IHOP? I have “SEE ID” written next to my signature.

  177. APFPilot says:

    @Meiran: card number + zip code = free gas!

  178. LibertyReign says:


    link or you made it up

    and you will need to provide evidence it was due to someone refusing to show I.D.

  179. ryanv1978 says:


    Thank you Meiran. Good to know there are some people out there with common sense who can make sensible decesions. My faith in humanity is somewhat restored.

  180. LibertyReign says:


    It does not protec tyou to show your I.D. Therefore you will have to redraw the line.

    I don’t mean to be difficult. It’s just a fact and I am genuinely curious as to where the line is for people who aren’t “unreasonably paranoid and difficult”.

  181. Lucky225 says:


    Aww, what a silly argument. Yes I must be silly. Except for the fact that Europe has been trying, if not already, to get RFID’s in it’s currency:


    But it would be such a silly notion that the US would do something like that to track the movements of it’s currency.

    Credit Card’s do not have ‘rightful owners’, they have authorized users, and authorized signatures that the merchant is supposed to check, Merchants have contractual agreements not to require ID. I know you can’t see the fact that the merchant is violating contract law(an illegal act) is a problem, apparently doing something illegal is just A-OK if it’s all in the name of “Security and Safety.”

  182. Lucky225 says:


    Well I guess since merchant agreements are a-ok to break, it’s a-ok for you to break the law and not update your address within 10 or 30 days or whatever the law states in your state.

  183. LibertyReign says:


    It is common for you to consider something that is inherently incorrect to be “sensible” isn’t it?

    Like this goes way beyond I.D.s at checkout doesn’t it? It’s like a sickness..a result of being brainwashed by corporations your whole life.


    Sometimes if you put it in caps people like..get it..or something..

  184. LibertyReign says:

    Oh and I would now like for all of you to provide me with you name, address, and DL #.


    There is nothing on it that is of any importance. It can NOT be used to harm you in any way



    LOL.. You can’t make this stuff people really think this way don’t you????

  185. forgottenpassword says:

    Ok, so THAT is settled! Now I want to now if stores have the right to ban you for not complying to show ID?

  186. Lucky225 says:


    Please don’t add fuel to flames, here comes the “Right to Refuse service for any reason” arguments. Lets put the blacks in the back and refuse service if they don’t like it.

  187. LibertyReign says:


    Yeah and where did that myth come from anyways?

    You do NOT have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Posting a sign in your store that says you do does not give you that right either.

  188. forgottenpassword says:


    WTF ARE you on about?

    I was responding to the original article, not your little argument in this thread. I am not looking to get into a flame war with you, I just want to find out a definitive answer.

  189. armishanks says:

    As info, Amex states it has no formal policy on Merchant ID requests. Once less reason to use Amex. You can download its merchant doc here


  190. Lucky225 says:


    hahaha yea, I’m just saying I can see the right to refuse service arguments coming in from your comment =)

  191. LibertyReign says:


    Yeah where do people get half of this crap?

    They just hear it in the street or on TV and they think its the law.

    Where’s the joker who said corporations have the right to I.D. you? I bet he thinks they also have the right to refuse to service for any reason.

  192. ryanv1978 says:

    The merchant agreement is not a law. Big difference between a contract and law.

    and i never said that info is not of any importance, of course it is. What i have said is there is no way that a cashier is going to obtain that info from you flasing your ID for 1-3 seconds.

    You can put an RFID into cash, but it won’t be to show who “owns” the cash.

    Credit cards don’t have an owner? That’s a good one. I am pretty sure I have a few in my money clip right now that I own with my name on them. Could have fooled me though. Who owns them?

    There lucky goes making racial/religious comments again….lowest common denominator these people are.

  193. ryanv1978 says:

    As a business owner I could ask you to leave my store for any reason. I could tell you that your not welcome back, and if you came back have you arrested on the spot for tresspassing.

    I do not need a reason to do this. It is my business and I reserve the right.

    Now if you can prove that I made this decision based upon discriminating evidence, you might have a case in court. Good luck proving that though.

    I thought you were trying to shop lift so I asked you to leave. End of story, and your not welcome back. Black white yellow or green it makes no difference, you would have to leave my store.

  194. APFPilot says:

    @ryanv1978: The Credit Card companies own the cards, not you.

  195. Lucky225 says:


    That’s funny I have one in my wallet right now that’s embossed with “Netspend User”.

    RFID’s have identifying numbers that can be read and traced to you. If RFIDs were in US Currency, they could be scanned as they were dispensed from an ATM transaction tied to your account number as the last person to obtain that bill. They could be scanned while inside your wallet and people would know how much money you have on your person, and the serial numbers of each bill tied to you.

    And you obviously don’t understand that violating a contract is a violation of law. A contract is LEGALLY binding, therefore a breach of it is illegal.

  196. LibertyReign says:


    If you can be tracked and traced everywhere you go and everything you buy is recorded who cares how you spell your name?

  197. ryanv1978 says:


    once again…get a judge to hear that in a courtroom. He’ll toss that case in discovery.

  198. LibertyReign says:


    You do not reserve any right to do that.

    link it or you made it up

  199. LibertyReign says:

    Could someone please explain the BIG DIFFERENCE between contracts and law?

    I’m lost here..

  200. ryanv1978 says:

    I don’t have any right to ask someone to leave my property?

    Excuse me? I need to link you to that?

    I could ask anyone to leave my property at anytime. No reason needed thank you.

  201. ryanv1978 says:

    A law starts out as a bill, and is passed by congress into law on either the state or fed level.

    A contract is NOT a law.

  202. LibertyReign says:

    As a business owner in our now socialist country you are required to be licensed and to adhere to Federal law.

    You are restricted by state law, state regulation, federal law, and in many circumstances federal regulations. You do not reserve the right to refuse service for any reason you feel like. That in fact is AGAINST the law. I can post the U.S. code for you if you like, can you post your code? (No, because you talk out of your ass and argue jus tto argue rather than having any basis fo ryour argument) If you tell me what state you are in there is 50/50 chance I can find a few state laws making an ass out of you as well.

    Remember! Nothing to hide now, what can someone possibly do with your PARTIAL address? *grin*

  203. LibertyReign says:


    That constitutes a BIG difference? Mmmkay. I considered it small since you will be in court and losing to me either way, but I guess that is a matter of opinion.

    Wait I just found another difference!

  204. LibertyReign says:


    The statement was “RIGHT to refuse SERVICE to anyone for ANY reason” and then you even added wether or not you could defend yourself in court with anything better than “cause I can” LOL. Commercial property is subject to certain extras that I do no thav eto put up with in my home. *grin*

  205. ryanv1978 says:

    There is a big difference between handing over all of your information to someone, and flashing an ID to someone.

    BIG DIFFERENCE. If you can’t see that then I really don’t know what to say.

  206. LibertyReign says:


    Ther eis a BIG difference between following your contractual obligations and purposefully violating them in order to protect your own profit margin.

    BIG difference. If you can’t see that then I really don’t know what to say.

  207. LibertyReign says:


    and that comment is in compliance to your invalid argument that a merchant would:

    a. become the instant victim of fraud once a customer upholds his right to pay without I.D.


    b. The card issuer would violate their own agreement as well by refusing to compensate the merchant accordingly.


    c. The merchant still has no recourse when the card issuer willingly violates its contractual obligation.

    Like has been pointed out several times your argument is false, but even within the constraints of your false argument violating your own contract can be shot down quite easily on more than one basis.

  208. LibertyReign says:

    Oh and could you please flash me your I.D. card. There isn’t anything on it which can be used against you, and there is NO WAY for me to memorize anything on it *grin*.

  209. johnva says:

    @ryanv1978: You do have the right to ask anyone to leave your property or refuse service for any reason. By signing a merchant agreement, you waived that right in this narrow case.

  210. ryanv1978 says:


    I’ll gladly flash you my ID, and I am quite sure you wouldn’t be able to memorize any of the info other than my name and my face which appear on it.

    It’s all in how you flash. If you people are smart enough to figure this out then I can’t help you. Your beyond my help.

  211. LibertyReign says:


    You cannot refuse service for ANY reason. That is an obvious myth.

  212. LibertyReign says:


    LOL!!! The libertarians have finally reduced your argument down to:

    “STFU and show your I.D. with your fingers over the good stuff AND be QUICK about it!” AHAHAHAHAHA! You kill me Ryan!!

  213. johnva says:

    @LibertyReign: Sorry, any otherwise lawful reason.

  214. LibertyReign says:

    We went from “I can refuse service for any reason I want”
    “you have no right to pay without I.D.”
    “There is no way that seeing your I.D. can compromise your security”
    “checking I.D. protects the consumer”



    “hide everything on your ID but your name and picture and FLASH it”

  215. ryanv1978 says:

    You asked me to show you my id. I can do that in a way that i don’t have to worry about you taking my info down.

  216. BigBoat says:

    Let’s pretend for the sake of argument that asking for ID and making it a condition of the sale is illegal. That means the merchant is in breach of contract, and the other party in privity can bring an action against them. So if Visa wants to sue them or cancel the contract, more power to them. Doesn’t have much to do with -you- though, who can be refused service at any time, for almost any reason.

    But wait, why would a merchant willingly breach their contract? Perhaps they think their increased safety from fraud is worth more than the damages they owe Visa? []

    It’s simply a business decision and they’re welcome to it. I generally don’t show ID (unless I particularly want the item) but that doesn’t mean the merchant can’t ask, or even that they’re “wrong” to deny the sale. Like those lovely “walking away from the mortgage” discussions we have, it’s simply a business decision.

  217. LibertyReign says:

    I have to admit Ryan.. I really AM the type of prick you make me out to be, so if all I had to show was a picture of mysel fwith my name on it, I would be pissy about it, but I just MIGHT comply…


  218. LibertyReign says:


    I get the point, but then you are a liar and you are in violation of your contractual obligations, and if you were an honest, compliant business man, you would REFUSE TO TAKE CREDIT CARDS and not sign the agreement.

    Is that unreasonable?

  219. ryanv1978 says:

    I don’t cover my info for a cashier..but for someone like you I might. You seem shifty.

  220. BigBoat says:

    @LibertyReign: Haha, well I’m not a business owner so I don’t know how I would choose to handle it. But if you’re an honest and compliant customer, you have nothing to hide, right? ;)

  221. LibertyReign says:


    Oh so your argument is that all cashiers are honest people who will treat your information as securely as you would yourself. Yeah..good argument.. *not touching that*

  222. LibertyReign says:


    *shudder* “you have nothing to hide, right”

    Oh Biggie… those words just make my American skin crawl ALL OVER!!!

    In my case I do not posess I.D.

  223. ryanv1978 says:


    My argument is that flashing an ID to a cashier for 1-3 seconds exposes you to no risk what so ever.

    Perhaps you think your average cashier has a photographic memory and can memorize your whole ID in those 3 second.

    I am smart enough to know that is not the case.

    Now if they wanted to photo copy it, or wrote down my info, that’s another story. But that isn’t what we are talking about here.

    I don’t even take my ID out of my wallet when asked for it. I do not hand it over to anyone. I show from my wallet, and then I leave the story with no hassle. I have never been the victim of ID theft and I am quite certain that if I am ever victim of it, it won’t originate from showing and ID to a cashier.

    You want to pretend your some type of patriot, but your not. Your just deranged.

    If someone possessed these skills, they wouldn’t be working a register at Kohl’s or any other store for that matter.

  224. LibertyReign says:


    Yeah and your argument sucks. You just proved it yourself tha tyour argument has no validity. Cashiers are all dumb; too dumb to be criminals.

    And my argument is still way better than yours.

    a. I dont have I.D. because I am not required to have one because I AM A PATRIOT.(its not an act)

    b. You are contractually obligated to take my payment without I.D.

    Your OPINION of cashiers is irrelevant.

  225. LibertyReign says:

    Im not deranged, just FREE. You should try it sometime. Buy yourself a pocket constitution with the money you make off of taking my payment WITHOUT I.D.

  226. strwnderer says:

    @StevenJohn: Take a look at your B of A merchant agreement. You are not allowed to ID. B of A’s merchant services department will tell you this if you ask, too. It may take them a month to give you a reply, but they will tell you that you cannot ID.

  227. witeowl says:

    @Eyebrows McGee: Of course I am speaking of rights in the general sense, not just those bestowed upon us by the Bill of Rights… right?

    @stacye: But… the store IS held liable for fraudulent charges. I don’t pay for those charges; Visa doesn’t pay for them. The merchant is left holding the bag. The only reason Visa won’t let the merchant protect itself is so that they don’t lose transactions/profits.

    @johnva: Right. So shop at stores which don’t ask for ID. “Vote” with your dollars. Why is this concept so hard to understand? I want to get the financial benefits of shopping somewhere they ask for ID. You want the privacy benefits of shopping somewhere they do not ask for ID. Clearly, we will have to shop in different stores. What’s wrong with having that, provided we’re notified upon entering the store?

    Oh, and one last time since you said that you still don’t “get it”: Although marginal/unproven security benefits is different from no security benefits, my main point is this: the more fraudulent charges the merchant has to cover, the more they charge me for my cheezy poofs. I would rather let them protect themselves so that I can continue to clog my arteries at rock-bottom prices.

  228. strwnderer says:


    Wrong. They do discipline merchants. Repeat reports against a merchant result in a fine. Believe me, they do discipline merchants.

    When you file a complaint, the complany goes to whoever processes for the given merchant. Whoever processes for the merchant then contacts the merchant and informs them of the violation. There are some cases where a processing company fails to contact a merchant (maybe they try to contact the merchant but can never get in touch with the owner/manager, etc.). However, a few additional violation reports do the trick in this case. It does take as much as 6 weeks for these violation reports to actually be processed but I’ve seen some where they stop asking for ID within a week of my filing a report.

  229. LibertyReign says:

    I get you rpoint and that would be a good argument if it was VALID. People refusing to show I.D. does not increase fraud and the issuers are liable for the merchandise either way.

  230. strwnderer says:


    The merchant gets screwed over in a chargeback when:

    1. The sales draft is illegible
    2. The sales draft has no signature or an unclear signature
    3. The card was not swiped and they have no imprint of the card
    4. The merchant does not respond to the chargeback by the deadline (between 10 days and a month)
    5. The merchant accepted an expired card

    All the merchant needs to do when there is a chargeback is submit (either via mail, fax, or even electronically with some merchants) a copy of the signed sales receipt to the processing company and they WILL be paid. Any merchant who is NOT being paid needs to find out WHY they are NOT being paid because THE MERCHANT is doing something wrong in this case.

  231. kyle4 says:

    I agree with Lucky225. I can’t stand how places like Wal-Mart request photo ID for a certain purchase price and if you don’t show them ID they will hold your card from you until you do. It seems they don’t realize that fraudulent cards nowadays have that person’s name (fake or real) on it and not yours.

  232. strwnderer says:


    Those merchants who ask for ID do still get chargebacks. They get just as many chargebacks asking everyone for ID as they do comparing signatures. I know this for a FACT based on a policy change at a previous meployer (as a result of a violation report we received for requiring ID).

    The chargebacks are for the reasons I outlined in a prior post. However, there is another one that I forgot:

    When a card is swiped and the card is DECLINED, the merchant is NOT allowed to run the card again. For some reason if it approves when run again, the merchant will be charged back and not paid. This was another source of chargebacks.

  233. strwnderer says:


    Yes they get a chargeback because of a stolen card. Any time there is any issue with a transaction (even something along the lines of a customer who “forgets” if they made a charge at your store), you get a chargeback and a request to provide a copy of the receipt. If there is a problem with the copy, you are charged back. If there was some other probem as I outlined in a prior post, then the merchant indeed does NOT get paid.

    If the merchant provides a COMPLETE, VALID, LEGIBLE copy of the signature slip to the processing company by the DEADLINE on the copy request, they ARE paid.

  234. Lucky225 says:


    I understand that, I was pointing out the fact that Checking ID does NOT prevent chargebacks, just as you are pointing out. Case and Point, they’re still getting Chargebacks even when they check for ID — obviously verifying that the cardholder is the cardholder is NOT the reason why they’re getting dinged if said policy is in place and they continue to get hit.

  235. LibertyReign says:


    so uh.. if the merchant adheres to the merchant agreement:

    a. they do not demand I.D.

    b. they do not get screwed

  236. strwnderer says:


    The only way they get screwed is through errors they make. Not correctly training their cashiers and not responding to chargebacks, basically.

    So those who are getting screwed need to figure out what is going on and address the issues. Asking all customers who pay with a SIGNED credit card for ID is not the way to address the issue and will get you nowhere.

    You can also supposedly get a chargeback for accepting an unsigned or “See ID” card, but I never saw that happen. Not very easy for the bank to find out that a card is actually unsigned unless the cardholder admits to it when asked, or it is retrieved and sent into the bank when recovered as a stolen card.

  237. consumerd says:


    So you can write “See ID” on the back of your card and them bitch them out for asking for ID? Damn.

    I don’t complain at them for pulling it out and showing them. I actually thank them for asking!

  238. Mary says:

    @Lucky225: I’m pretty sure that the agreement says that you can’t be refused for refusing to show extra ID, not that they can’t request it.

    Also, I have updated my address. Which is evidenced by the little card hidden in BEHIND my license, which I can conveniently show to anybody that actually needs to see it. But they don’t issue you a new license for an address change here.

    As for the protection, you think it doesn’t protect anybody to ask for ID. I think it does. The beautiful thing here is that we’re free to disagree, and now we all know what we are and aren’t allowed to do. You go on refusing to show your ID, and I’ll go on happily complying by showing mine.

    It’s called picking your battles. I don’t think this one is worth fighting.

  239. Lucky225 says:


    Well good for you, you don’t have to fight them. Continue showing your ID and not caring.

    “and now we all know what we are and aren’t allowed to do.”

    That’s the problem is that we don’t all know it, merchant’s are misinformed, and it inconveniences us that DO care. Then the ones who don’t continue to persuade merchants with misinformation that it’s okay, and thank them for breaking their contract. If we all knew what was what, and every merchant in the country asked for ID, but didn’t require it when you declined I’d be happy, and you could thank the merchant pretending they actually did something(knowing that in reality someone could just decline anyways). And everyone would be fine.

    I don’t mind if you feel free showing your papers to who anyone who asks, but don’t push the idea off on merchants who think they’re going to make me show them.

  240. armishanks says:

    To clarify, Amex takes no position on merchants requiring ID, unlike Visa and MasterCard. According to the Amex rep I spoke with, merchants can pretty make any stipulation or condition they want, except for a minimum charge requirement, or requiring a premium to pay via Amex versus cash.

    Thanks for that Amex! No wonder you suck.

  241. RvLeshrac says:

    @Git Em SteveDave:

    Actually, they require your signed name or mark.

    If you write “SEE ID” on your card, you’d better be writing “SEE ID” on the receipt.

  242. RvLeshrac says:


    “3” does not count if the card was keyed including the CVV/CVV2. No imprint necessary. Hence why online transactions now require a CVV.

    If only they’d stop printing it using the cheapest ink possible. I had to memorize it on my cards because my wallet has rubbed it off all of them.

  243. Natheo says:

    Im one of these retail employees that have to deal with this shitty double standard, people on one side of the fence that bitch at me if I don’t check id, and people on the other that do.

    If you have see ID written on your card, I ask for ID. If you have nothing written on your card, I ask for ID. If that’s a problem for you, then just sign your damn ID.

    I really don’t see why there’s such a big fuss over this, but I do think it says a lot about the public at large.

  244. sycophant says:

    And, for the millionth time, if a merchant has adhered to the requirements of accepting a card transaction (the receipt is signed and the signature basically matches the card) then they stand to lose no money in cases of fraudulent transaction (with some exceptions).

    On the other hand if the merchant fucked it up and card company is going to refuse the charge, then the merchant saying “oh, but our cashier checked the ID” isn’t going to make any damn difference. Especially as that ID isn’t recorded in anyway.

  245. Mary says:

    @Lucky225: I was using “we” to stand in for “we, who read Consumerist and read this article and are now debating it in the comments.”

    If the person in front of me at the store turned around during an argument with the clerk and said, “Did you know that they can’t refuse me this purchase if I don’t show my ID?” I would happily say, “Yes, it is in violation of their merchant agreement, you should ask to call Visa from their phone.”

    If I still worked at a store, I would only be asking for ID if the card was unsigned (and thus not valid) or if it specifically said “See ID.” Most stores seem to operate on that principle. If my manager told me to check everyone’s ID, I would inform him of this clause in the merchant agreement.

    Everybody who reads this article now is empowered with knowledge to do with what they will.

  246. ryanv1978 says:


    Amex is the best card out there if you can afford it. I get so many additional benefit from my amex card it’s ridiculous.

  247. LibertyReign says:


    Which as far as I can see is all clearly outlined in the agreement.

    So what I am saying your agreements, adhere to them, SUCCESS!

  248. LibertyReign says:


    ASKING me for I.D. is insulting and obnoxious, but I am a very cordial and curteous patron. I will simply respond “No, THank You” and then as long as you take my card and stfu with a smile on your face it’s all good.

    Please do not imply that because some uninformed people bitch when you DON’T ask for I.D. then that means that you must DEMAND it from everyone else. Another silly, baseless argument.

    You can ask if you like. It’s a waste of your time and invasion of my privacy, but DEMANDING and calling the cops???? Quite another story.

  249. LibertyReign says:


    And, for the millionth time, if a merchant has adhered to the requirements of accepting a card transaction (the receipt is signed and the signature basically matches the card) then they stand to lose no money in cases of fraudulent transaction (with some exceptions).

    On the other hand if the merchant fucked it up and card company is going to refuse the charge, then the merchant saying “oh, but our cashier checked the ID” isn’t going to make any damn difference. Especially as that ID isn’t recorded in anyway.

    Yes. This is what happens in the really real world. This is why people like Ryan are completely and totally full of crap. The truth is that a lot of people are brainwashed into be good little slaves and they get scared when some of the other slaves start to rebel. They like not having to protect themselves or be responsible for their own lives so when people come along and threaten the master’s authority they become defensive and start making up a variety of ridiculous reasons to comply and obey and force those around them to do the same.

  250. sventurata says:

    Ok, firstly: Ben, thanks for stepping up to the plate. I called you on this (or similar) a while back, and I hereby revoke my bitchy claims that Consumerist fails to research posts! (For now!)

    Secondly… you know what, never mind. Anyone who genuinely believes refusing to pony up ID for a credit card purchase* is a GOD-GIVEN RIGHT doesn’t deserve my time.

  251. LibertyReign says:

    refusing to show you rpapers is an unalienable right endowed by the creator..

    reading is fun and learning is too

  252. LibertyReign says:
  253. LibertyReign says:


    John Russo has been a victim of identity theft. So when he was asked to fork over a photo ID just to be seated at an IHOP pancake restaurant, he flipped.

    Is THIS too far yet?

    I really HATE being right..

  254. LibertyReign says:


  255. Mary says:

    @LibertyReign: Yes, that is in fact too far.

  256. LibertyReign says:


    but why?

    Cashiers and waitreses are all too stupid to steal your info. Thats why they are cashiers and waitresses. They don’t possess ANY marketable skills nor do they posess any brain-power.

    It is not an invasion of privacy. Afterall, there is nothing on your I.D. which can be used against you anyways. Are you PARANOID about some stranger knowing your home address? *rolls his eyes* You’re a whacko or something conpiratorial like that..

    You don’t have a right to refuse to be I.D.’d when traveling and patronizing American stores. You should stfu and comply. No one wants to wait behind you in line, and THEY have the RIGHT to be impatient and demanding of their more than precious time.

    It’s not like it could lead to anything else. This is just your I.D. and just to prevent fraud and stealing. It’s not like it could progressively get worse if you comply, encourage others to comply publically, and make it more socially acceptable over time.


  257. Mary says:

    @LibertyReign: You know, I always assumed the ability to look at a situation critically and think about it as it’s own situation instead of viewing everything as a horribly dangerous slippery slope was the kind of thing we were supposed to learn to do as we grew up and learned to live in society.

    I don’t believe cashiers and waitresses are too stupid to steal your information. I think they don’t give a damn. I worked retail for ten years, I know I didn’t care a whit about anything written on somebody’s ID card. Most cashiers don’t even LOOK, they’re just asking to see if you present it or not. If you whip out the ID, they go “Look, they have it” and move on.

    When you can show me an instance of a two second register ID check resulting in identity theft, I’ll reconsider. But I don’t think it ever has happened, and I don’t think it ever will. You can stand on your invasion of privacy, that’s a valid idea and I don’t believe it but I can see how you would.

    But protecting your identity? Next you’ll be saying a police officer has no right to ask for your license when you get pulled over for reckless driving because he might memorize your address.

    All that said, I still think if you have a problem and you’re within the merchant agreement to refuse, then by all means refuse. That isn’t going to stop most of the population from thinking you’re overreacting and being bothersome. Why? Because we recognize that the cashier isn’t some seedy identity thief waiting for the perfect idiot. They’re just somebody who was told to ask for ID so they did, and you’ll be lucky if they remember your name two seconds after you’ve walked away.

    If the people who did these jobs wanted to be thieves, there are much better targets than a two second glance at your license.

  258. LibertyReign says:

    It has already been proven to be a slippery slope. Just because you haven’t been paying attention does not make me immature, it just makes you ignorant. You have been as ignorant in this thread as you appear to be in your daily life, and as you are to society, and how the grid works as a whole. Whipping out your I.D. has already become irrelevant because of sheeple like you there are waitresses all the way in hicksville that think it’s ok to KEEP your DL while you eat.

    I can stand on my invasion of privacy as a human being having been born with certain unalienable rights. I don’t have to prove SHIT to you. My rights are given to me by GOD. Your opinion is absolutely meaningless. My identity cannot be stolen from my I.D. BECAUSE I DON’T HAVE A FRACKIN’ I.D.!!! That is why I CHOOSE to pay with MASTERCARD because I.D. MAY NOT BE REQUIRED!!! Again, you pay attention here as well as you do in every other facet of your existence which is why you are ignorant to MY rights, YOUR rights, and the “slippery slope” to which we have already reached the bottom. These invasions of privacy WILL get worse. It is not my opinion, and you WILL remain ignorant, unfortunately for all of us.

    A police officer does NOT have the right to ask for my license. In fact, that is against the law. A Police officer has NO rights whatsoever outside of the one’s afforded to him as a HUMAN BEING. If you understand that simple concept I wouldn’t have to be schooling you on the fundamentals of human society. Reckless driving is a CRIME. While eating at IHOP may be a travesty of injustice, there is currently no LAWS against it. Your argument is baseless, ignorant, moronic and completely irrelevant to reality and to this situation as is your position on my privacy. I reiterate MY privacy. I can not be pulled over for reckless driving and have my I.D. confiscated because I DO NOT HAVE I.D.!!! I am hoping if I repeat that enough times with enough caps it will start to sink in.

    A majority of the population will ALWAYS remain ignorant and docile. “A majority of the population” is what holds us back as a species, and “a majority of the population” will continue to be thankless, disrespectful, ignorant, and dismissive of the minority which will constantly fight to protect and evolve it. You will always be an ignorant conformist and you will never thank me or those like me for fighting for your freedoms and creating new innovative methods of thought and perception. I will never be thanked by the likes of you for contributing to the evolution of your entire species, and you will NEVER apologize for the retardation of said evolution. This is the story of mankind throughout it’s history. It was a minority that stood on two legs and walked the great plains of Africa. It was a minority that sailed the ocean and mapped the world. It was a minority that sculpted the first sculptures, painted the first paintings, and built the first buildings. It was a minority that fought the Roman empire. It was a minority that fought the British Empire. It was a minority that drafted the Declaration of Independence and created the first ever experiment in freedom which produced the most innovative, scientifically advanced, powerful nation in the history of mankind. It has always been the MINORITY that is advanced, and the masses which are docile, uninformed and too stuck in their brainwashed ways to listen to the motivations of the minority.

    I don’t care what YOU think of the world. You obviously have not bothered to experience much of it. I have been a victim of fraud three times in my life. All three were as a result of an employee breaking the law while working for a merchant where I had made purchases. It is beyond my capacity to cure your ignorance, so you can CHOOSE not to believe that, because I am not going to show you the police reports. Unfortunately your ignorance, is YOURS to cure. I can only offer small tidbits of illuminating truth. You can still choose to keep your eyes closed.

    Again, your OPINION of cashiers is irrelevant because REALITY has already proven you wrong. Not only in my personal life but in the NEWS stories I have posted here. Fifteen minutes on Google News would be enough for you yourSELF to prove to yourself that you are full of shit and obviously ignorant about the supposed divinity of cashiers.

  259. Mary says:

    I’m glad that you think so highly of yourself and your crusade.

    But I’ll continue to believe what I believe, and you’ll continue to be convinced that everyone is out to get you and that only CONSTANT VIGILANCE can protect you.

    I think my world is a much better place to live in. If, ten years down the line, I suddenly find myself victim of fraud because a cashier looked at my driver’s license for ten seconds, I’ll be sure to think, “Wow, that random person on the internet was right.”

    Cashiers aren’t infallible. There are situations where they have participated in identity theft. A ten second glance at your ID when you use a credit card is not one of them. TEN SECONDS. That is what I’m talking about. Not about walking off with it, not about writing down your information on a check, not about even carrying your card to a kiosk to ring you up.

    If you want to continue to think I’m running around shouting my social from rooftops or something, have fun with that. You obviously want to feel like you’re on a righteous crusade and make a bigger situation out of this than I’m even talking about.

    If you’re going to think refusing to show your ID when you use your credit card is equal to the Declaration of Independence or the overthrow of the Roman Empire, I’m sure you’re life is fascinating. I have better things to do.

  260. LibertyReign says:

    “The war for freedom will never really be won because the price of our freedom is constant vigilance over ourselves and over our Government.”
    ~ Eleanor Roosevelt ~

    It is not MY opinion that freedom requires “CONSTANT VIGILANCE”. It is a proven historical FACT. I will continue to pursue all endeavors which are pro-liberty and which support the rights of all individuals in my personal and professional life. Acts which go well beyond cashiers and IHOPS.

    As far as this thread is concerned I will leave my personal life out of it and remain content with constantly disproving your statements and stripping down your arguments to brainwashed rhetoric.

    By the way can I have your name, DL#, and address yet? ..and if you aren’t ignorant then you are just in denial because I have already proven that constant submission to unwarranted violations of privacy result in not only criminal acts of fraud but a further invasion of privacy. Your comments suggest that you either ignored the evidence I posted or you are too stupid or afraid to recognize it.

    No worries though my friend. Those who go along to get along should be able to surf through tyranny unaffected. You will take your chip like a good little sheep and hand over your biometrics whenever demanded.

  261. LibertyReign says:

    All I need is 6 seconds, you can keep the other 4. In fact, just CALL me and give me your information, I will memorize it in the short time it takes for you to READ it. That should be even less than 4 seconds.

  262. LibertyReign says:

    oh and one more time because it looks like you STILL didn’t catch it..



  263. ryanv1978 says:

    the police can and will ask for you ID all day long if they pull you over for wreckless driving, which is exactly what was said above.

    Reading the info out loud for someone and having them read it is two very different things. Plus, we already know how your convulted mind works so why would we want to give you our info, it seems to me that if anyone would know how to steak an identity it would you.

    you are retarded…good thin retards have rights too.