Question about signing the back of cards.

[Open123]

---

@woodyman100 wrote:

My signatures just wear off within a couple of weeks in my wallet

---

I just use a fine point blue sharpie.  The sig will out last the card.

[slicemans]

It is pointless. Most people who ask for ID look at your credit card name. They never look at your signature.

[Open123]

---

@slicemans wrote:

It is pointless. Most people who ask for ID look at your credit card name. They never look at your signature.

---

For Visa/MC, a Merchant may not refuse a purchase for a refusal to show an ID.  However, if a card is unsigned, a Merchant must request ID, witness the card being signed, and then compare the signature to the ID's before accepting the card.

Just curious, why is such a simple T&C rule so often confused and misunderstood?

[mitchblue]

---

@Open123 wrote:

---

@slicemans wrote:

It is pointless. Most people who ask for ID look at your credit card name. They never look at your signature.

---

For Visa/MC, a Merchant may not refuse a purchase for a refusal to show an ID.  However, if a card is unsigned, a Merchant must request ID, witness the card being signed, and then compare the signature to the ID's before accepting the card.

Just curious, why is such a simple T&C rule so often confused and misunderstood?

---

Not really misunderstood just that those merchants you mention don't seem to know it themselves. No one ver asks me to sign my cards, ever. 

[Anonymous]

Not once been asked to sign my card. Ever.

Local USPS asks for ID, which I am happy to provide.

[Open123]

I couldn’t care less about what Merchants know or don’t know. If they violate a portion of the T&C with me that I find inconvenient, I’ll confront them by offering to call the Issuer.

When it comes to this portion of the T&C, people here either: (1) knowingly and blatantly violate it, and even boast about it; (2) are completely ignorant of it coming up with ad hoc policies to suite their views; and, (3) these same very people reprimand “others” for violating the T&C.

(Mod Cut-Last warning, knock this stuff off, its not up to you to determine what is or isnt against the TOS of this board.)

[Anonymous]

---

@Open123 wrote:

I couldn’t care less about what Merchants know or don’t know. If they violate a portion of the T&C with me that I find inconvenient, I’ll confront them by offering to call the Issuer.

When it comes to this portion of the T&C, people here either: (1) knowingly and blatantly violate it, and even boast about it; (2) are completely ignorant of it coming up with ad hoc policies to suite their views; and, (3) these same very people reprimand “others” for violating the T&C.

---

Whether or not to sign the back of the card is a valuable discussion as to the safety measures that are in place and how to best keep your information private. While I have an opinion on what I think is the best method of doing so, I recognize that others have a point on some topics and may change my methods going forwards. The lack of merchant checks and the inability of the cards to hold standard pen ink are major drawbacks here, which may lead some people to believe that their information is best protected by hoping that the merchant will ask for an ID, either by writing "SEE ID" or by not signing at all.

However, if you feel this strongly about the subject, perhaps you should request that a mod lock this thread. It certainly seems to be inflaming passions and devolving from discourse into a "he said/she said" argument between extremes. I will also be hoping that chip/pin, which would resolve this issue, arrives in the U.S. sometime in the next 50 years.

[Open123]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

However, if you feel this strongly about the subject, perhaps you should request that a mod lock this thread. It certainly seems to be inflaming passions and devolving from discourse into a "he said/she said" argument between extremes. I will also be hoping that chip/pin, which would resolve this issue, arrives in the U.S. sometime in the next 50 years.

---

I've never run to any mods here or otherwise on posts, and certainly won't start now.  Of course, unless my preference to point out BS and blatant hypocrisy is or becomes a violation of FSR, I have no qualms with this thread continuing.

Do you?

[Open123]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Open123 wrote:

I couldn’t care less about what Merchants know or don’t know. If they violate a portion of the T&C with me that I find inconvenient, I’ll confront them by offering to call the Issuer.

When it comes to this portion of the T&C, people here either: (1) knowingly and blatantly violate it, and even boast about it; (2) are completely ignorant of it coming up with ad hoc policies to suite their views; and, (3) these same very people reprimand “others” for violating the T&C.

---

 Whether or not to sign the back of the card is a valuable discussion as to the safety measures that are in place and how to best keep your information private. While I have an opinion on what I think is the best method of doing so, I recognize that others have a point on some topics and may change my methods going forwards. The lack of merchant checks and the inability of the cards to hold standard pen ink are major drawbacks here, which may lead some people to believe that their information is best protected by hoping that the merchant will ask for an ID, either by writing "SEE ID" or by not signing at all.

However, if you feel this strongly about the subject, perhaps you should request that a mod lock this thread. It certainly seems to be inflaming passions and devolving from discourse into a "he said/she said" argument between extremes. I will also be hoping that chip/pin, which would resolve this issue, arrives in the U.S. sometime in the next 50 years.

---

So, this clear violation of Visa's and MC's T&C is a "valuable" discussion because you say it is?  Is that right?

[Anonymous]

---

@Open123 wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Open123 wrote:

I couldn’t care less about what Merchants know or don’t know. If they violate a portion of the T&C with me that I find inconvenient, I’ll confront them by offering to call the Issuer.

When it comes to this portion of the T&C, people here either: (1) knowingly and blatantly violate it, and even boast about it; (2) are completely ignorant of it coming up with ad hoc policies to suite their views; and, (3) these same very people reprimand “others” for violating the T&C.

---

 Whether or not to sign the back of the card is a valuable discussion as to the safety measures that are in place and how to best keep your information private. While I have an opinion on what I think is the best method of doing so, I recognize that others have a point on some topics and may change my methods going forwards. The lack of merchant checks and the inability of the cards to hold standard pen ink are major drawbacks here, which may lead some people to believe that their information is best protected by hoping that the merchant will ask for an ID, either by writing "SEE ID" or by not signing at all.

However, if you feel this strongly about the subject, perhaps you should request that a mod lock this thread. It certainly seems to be inflaming passions and devolving from discourse into a "he said/she said" argument between extremes. I will also be hoping that chip/pin, which would resolve this issue, arrives in the U.S. sometime in the next 50 years.

---

So, this clear violation of Visa's and MC's T&C is a "valuable" discussion because you say it is?  Is that right?

---

Obviously I think it is, or I wouldn't have said so. Presumably you do as well, as you're taking the time to respond. And, I'm guessing that there are a fair few who agree with me, since there are 6 pages of this thread, and it keeps on getting bumped by various parties. (Mod Cut-nonFSR)