Dear Linkedin,

Sun Jun 10 19:29:46 UTC 2012

The credit card companies should pull their heads out of their asses about this.

It is much better from an anti-fraud perspective for a stolen card not to contain a specimen signature for the thief to learn to forge.

It is far preferable for the merchant to request ID and verify that the signature matches the ID _AND_ the picture in the ID matches the customer.

I've never had my card refused because I wrote SEE ID on the signature panel in lieu of my signature. I have been frequently asked for my ID and make a point of thanking the merchant for their diligence in each of those cases.

I've only had one merchant get a little persnickety about the lack of a signature technically invalidating the card. I basically explained why I did it that way and informed them that they could cancel the transaction if they didn't like my methods. They chose not to cancel the transaction.
(Which was a rather significant sale in a relatively small shop)

Owen

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 10, 2012, at 3:58 AM, Joe Greco <jgreco at ns.sol.net> wrote:

>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Barry Shein" <bzs at world.std.com>
>> 
>>> A friend would print in block letters in the sig area of his credit
>>> cards "ASK FOR PHOTO ID". He said that almost always cashiers et al
>>> would give a cursory glance like they were checking his signature and
>>> say thank you and hand him back his card.
>> 
>> This seems like an altogether excellent time to haul out *this* old
>> chestnut:
>> 
>>  http://www.zug.com/pranks/credit/
>> 
>> FWIW, My cards have always said SEE ID, and I get about a 40% or so hit
>> rate on that.  It's been odd recently, cause I sometimes forget, and the
>> privacy reflex kicks in and makes me want to say "Why??"  :-)
> 
> If your card is not signed, your card is invalid and should not be 
> accepted by any merchant.
> 
> http://www.mastercard.com/us/merchant/pdf/MerchantAcceptanceGuide_Manual.pdf
> 
> Page 8-2; "Unsigned Credit Cards".  VISA has similar requirements.
> 
> Writing "SEE ID" in the signature panel primarily makes your card invalid
> *unless* your signature is also present.
> 
> One of the design goals of the V/MC system is that a cardholder is not
> supposed to need anything other than their card and the ability to sign.
> The comparison of the signature provided to the card signature is 
> supposed to be one of the primary ways to validate a cardholder, but of
> course these days, most vendors are lazy and don't.
> 
> In fact, one of my favorite abusive merchant practices, trying to require
> ID, is expressly prohibited:
> 
> http://www.mastercard.com/us/merchant/pdf/BM-Entire_Manual_public.pdf
> 
> Page 5-14, sec. 5.8.4, "Additional Cardholder Identification".
> 
> They're allowed to ask, you're allowed to refuse, and absent a good
> reason, they're not allowed to refuse your transaction.  Now, if your
> signature doesn't match or something else is particularly fishy, yes,
> then they should require it, but they cannot require it by default for
> all transactions they process.
> 
> That and a "minimum charge" are among the two most common merchant
> violations I see.
> 
> For MasterCard violations, report them!
> 
> http://www.mastercard.us/support/merchant-violations.html
> 
> ... JG
> -- 
> Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
> "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
> won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
> With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.