I can and do which is ultimately why I think the friendly request posted by the register is a better option than a strictly enforced policy. From a practical point I think it would be bad PR for a customer to be refused service when they honestly tell you “That’s all I have”
I think it’s unfortunate that folks might be more concerned about the technicality of the agreement and on insisting that it’s followed to the letter regardless of how it affects the merchant but I’ve met plenty of them and that doesn’t make them bad people. If someone wants to bitch about that when I ask for ID on a credit card I’m prepared to methodically follow the letter of the agreement , which will take at least twice as long. More if their signature is some indistinct scrawl.
If they wanted to argue over the minimum purchase detail I’d likely process it while trying to explain the reasons for the policy. Perhaps an economics education might sway them.
I fully understand the reasons for the policy. I’m sure most people can figure out why a merchant doesn’t want to process payments under a certain amount. They don’t need an economics education. I could just as easily say it’s the shopkeeper who needs the economics lesson for not figuring out how to account for this fee in the price of his goods.
Of course you do, as you’ve just demonstrated. The basic reason is of course to cut down on one area of overhead, in this case, CC processing fees. What the average customer doesn’t know and probably doesn’t even think about is the fact that part of the processing fee is figured by average sale amount processed. So if the average goes down because of lots of small sales on cards it’s a much more significant impact than just that one minor sale. Another thing the average customer might not know or consider is that we pay a fee for processed returns as well so when something comes back and the customer gets it credited back on your account we pay two fees for that sale with zero income. That has to be made up somewhere.
Now maybe that doesn’t matter to you at all and it’s true it’s not your problem. Based on my experience with customers and other responses in this thread many of them can muster enough consideration for a small business to give a dam about their efforts to stay afloat and choose a payment method that helps out their fellow human.
As someone commented earlier , why should the person who bothers to carry cash pay higher prices because of your preferences? You not only don’t give a shit about the merchant you also don’t care about your fellow customers and how your need for convenience might affect them.
Maybe you can understand why I’m not moved to sympathy by your righteous indignation over such a minor detail.
That being said I can accept that a polite request for cooperation is better than a strict policy that customers might find offensive.
Actually, I would bet most people don’t have a clue how much it costs a merchant to sell stuff on credit. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if a large majority of people thought Visa made almost all of their money on interest charged to card holders.
Until they get a “Minimum Purchase” policy explained to them, I guess. 
eta: Actually, I don’t really remember their profit pyramid either - though I’m sure I’ve looked it up. Hope my little opinion withstands that admission.
Obviously, we’re not going to see eye-to-eye on this one, so whatever. However, here’s another question: I know a merchant cannot charge a surcharge for using credit, but is he allowed to technically offer a discount for using cash?
They don’t have to know how much or what it costs. I didn’t know how much it cost. But when I see a sign that says “No credit card purchases under $10,” what logical reason is there for a store to have that policy? I wouldn’t assume it’s merely to inconvenience the customer–I’d assume it’s because, somehow, there is some sort of charge that causes transactions under $10 to be less profitable or unprofitable to the merchant.
In California, at least, the answer is yes. Gas stations sometimes do it. When the local newspaper consumer columnist was asked “Isn’t this a contradiction: prohibiting a surcharge for using credit cards but allowing a discount for using cash?”, the columnist said that it is, but laws are written by committee, and that’s the way it is.
Ed
Good to know! Now I’ll have to more seriously consider accepting Visa and Mastercard for my services.
So many posts in this thread seem to be asking what the merchant can and cannot do. The bottom line is the merchant can accept or refuse any (legal) payment he sees fit (it’s HIS business, right?) If the merchant wants to be paid in pennies, it’s his right to demand that. And it’s your right to refuse to purchase the item/service and not shop there.
Yes the merchant may have signed an agreement with Visa, but that agreement is between Visa and the merchant, and if the merchant does a decent amount of business it’s probably not in Visa’s best interest to hassle the merchant.
Correct. However, if you agree to accept payment for my business in pennies, you have waived the right to refuse to do so; if I then attempt to pay you in pennies, and you refuse that payment, you are in violation of your own agreed-upon terms.
Probably not, but what VISA’s interests may or may not be has no bearing on the merchant’s promise to accept the card.
I really want to know where this notion is coming from that it’s ethical to renege on your word to someone just because the other party doesn’t expressly punish you for doing so in a timely fashion. Anyone care to posit any kind of logical defense of that? If so, I’ll likely have some follow-up questions about the basis of the rest of your personal ethos.
Maybe it’s not exactly ethical to not honor every bit of the Visa merchant agreement, but let’s face it, credit card sales are a necessary evil to many merchants. The bank/credit card company gets a cut of every credit card sale you make, and they didn’t really do anything for your business to deserve that money (unless you can argue the sale wouldn’t have happened if you didn’t accept credit cards.)
I think also that if you run too many low-dollar charges your rate goes up, so while the credit card company says you can’t refuse low-dollar transactions, you also get penalized for them. They’ve got you either way.
Ahhh well I think thats a reasonable suggestion. offer a 3 to 5% discount for cash.
That way you uphold the technicality of the agreement but offer encouragement for your customers to carry cash. Either way it boils down to finding a reasonable compromise to help the merchant lower their overhead.
A question though…ask yourself honestly. If your local store marked things up a wee bit {per your suggestion} and displayed a sign offering a discount for cash, would you be more likely to carry cash to patronize them, or would you simply find store that didn’t mark things up in order to defray CC fees?
But I believe those stores do mark things up in order to defray CC fees. It’s just an invisible mark-up that’s present in the price of the merchandise. Or at least it should be, if the CC charges are really costing you that much money.
I was more interested in the answer to the question for my business, which only handles a few dozen big ticket transactions per year. I think the small store should just price the fees into the goods, to be honest. I don’t think they should offer discounts for cash. It’s easier to simply price everything into the goods you are selling. A small business can defray the costs and follow the letter of the merchant agreement. Many have figured this out. Some don’t bother.
I mean, seriously, why is this so difficult? A merchant can defray the cost of the credit card processing fees and not piss off any customers. Even if I or you believe it’s okay to break the merchant agreement with the credit card company, there are obviously people, such as evidenced in this thread, who do get pissed off with such practices. Why alienate anybody when you don’t have to? Why not keep your customer base as big as possible. Maybe the amount of folks who give a damn about this is pretty small, but there’s no need to piss anybody off.
First of all, I don’t think there are that many people who will be using their cards for such small purchases. All you have to do is calculate in how many people you can expect to make micropurchases, and mark up a product or series of product slightly to make up whatever you’re losing in the micropayments. Nobody’s going to notice or care if a bottle of wine is 50 cents more or if a pack of gum is an extra nickel (or whatever goods add up to equal the purchases lost in micropayments). Personally, unless the amount of customers using the cards for micropayments is significant, I probably wouldn’t raise any prices at all, for accepting credit cards should, in theory, increase my bottom line anyway. But you can do it however you want to. It seems there’s so many ways to deal with this fee and not irk anyone in the process and remain faithful to the agreement you signed.
If the sale has been rung up and the merchant has asked for tender of payment and then the customer offers Visa – No, the merchant is no longer free (under the terms of the Visa contract) to refuse the sale.
How utterly insane.
Anyway, talking about Visas, all the post offices around here got sent UV things a couple of weeks ago, and I’ve been playing with it, putting all kinds of things in it.
Did you know there’s an Eagle on your Visa card (and similar things for most other credit cards)? Try it!
How is it insane? How else can you enforce a contract term that says “under this contract, you can’t enforce a minimum purchase”? Under your rubric, such a term would be meaningless.
Consider the extreme case. Customer buys five dollar (let’s work in cents!) item.
Then:
Customer presents 500 Visa cards and says “I will pay 1 cent on each of these”. I cannot refuse.
Customer presents me with 500 one cent pieces. I refuse gladly.
In the OP’s case, I do understand that he is contractually correct. I also think he is overreacting. I think only those in this thread who are being purposefully dense don’t understand that there is a problem with the current system in regards to small transactions. Unfortunately, Visa and MasterCard are 600 ton gorillas compared to the small mom and pop stores and shops. It seems that the compromise is these small minimum purchase amounts and then everyone looks the other way.
Regarding the bar that tossed the OP, I believe it is their right to refuse service to anyone they wish. I got a chuckle out of that story. I could see the same thing playing itself out at the local pub I go to on occasion. I have no doubt that the rest of the patrons got a good laugh at your expense as the door was hitting you in the ass.
It happens more than you probably think. I imagine just about any small business owner could tell you stories. I know RogueGF has plenty from her time accepting credit cards. Quite honestly, people suck.