Fuck you, "Mom & Pop" stores (VISA related)

The BBQ Pit
81

[QUOTE=Una Persson]
How about business owners show some honour and integrity and follow the rules of the contract they signed with the credit card company? Seriously, it’s hard to believe that you own a business and don’t understand that when you sign a contract of service that says you won’t surcharge or set a minimum purchase amount (at least in the US - if this doesn’t apply in your jurisdiction, then that isn’t applicable), that you actually follow the contract? If the cardholder doesn’t follow the rules of the contract, then there are financial penalties, loss of service, and a poor credit record which can result. So why does the business owner get to pick and choose which parts of the contract they obey?

(Most) People aren’t asking that business owners take Visa no matter what, they’re asking that business owners obey the contracts they sign.

And if business owners decide to remain in the last century and not take credit cards, then, well, they can roll the dice and take their chances as to whether their business model is successful. More power to them. The market will decide. I’ve walked away from purchases worth thousands of pounds in the UK because for some reason a shop decided that they wouldn’t take cards or cheques, only cash. Seriously, is it reasonable to expect that someone walking through your door has £2000 of cash in their purse?
[/QUOTE]

It does seem odd to me that such a business doesn’t take cards.

There is nothing in our contract to stop me from imposing a minimum order, and I assure you that if there were then it would not be enforceable under British law. Which is probably why it isn’t there.

Methinks that Visa don’t care, either. With the sophisticated algorithms that banks have developed to pick up on credit card fraud, you’d think that if they did care they would investigate businesses where every credit card purchase seemed to be over $10. This leads me to conclude that the concept of using Visa everywhere is more marketing to gullible consumers than anything else.

82

[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
Do you want to pay twice as much for your bottle of coke? We’re not talking “a bit” here, at least not in my shop.
[/QUOTE]
Baloney. VISA fees are 2.9%. If you spread that out over all purchases, we’re talking a fraction of one percent. If you have to double your prices, you should go out of business.

83

[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
Baloney. VISA fees are 2.9%. If you spread that out over all purchases, we’re talking a fraction of one percent. If you have to double your prices, you should go out of business.
[/QUOTE]

You forget the minimum fee.

It is also impractical to raise prices by 2.9% across the board. I should have thought the reasons for this are obvious.

84

[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
It is also impractical to raise prices by 2.9% across the board. I should have thought the reasons for this are obvious.
[/QUOTE]
What is obvious is that not all purchases use credit cards. Spread the 2.9% across all purchases, and you get a fraction of one percent. I should have thought a merchant would know this.

85

[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
What is obvious is that not all purchases use credit cards. Spread the 2.9% across all purchases, and you get a fraction of one percent. I should have thought a merchant would know this.
[/QUOTE]

And how do you propose that I raise my prices by “a fraction of one percent”?

86

And how do you work the 2.9% out? Remember that we are only talking about purchases under £10 here. So we are talking a significantly greater cut than 2.9%, in fact.

87

[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
And how do you propose that I raise my prices by “a fraction of one percent”?
[/QUOTE]
(Price of product * percent of increase) + price of product= new price. Round up fractions of a penny.

When you became a shopkeeper, did you not know there would be math?

88

[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
There is nothing in our contract to stop me from imposing a minimum order, and I assure you that if there were then it would not be enforceable under British law. Which is probably why it isn’t there.
[/QUOTE]

And that’s my point - most folks here are complaining about the times when there is a contract in place, and the business is willfully choosing to violate it. Seriously, if a business owner has a contract with suppliers, subcontractors, or even their cleaning crew, they would squeal like a stuck pig if they people they dealt with decided ad hoc which parts of the contracts they would or would not obey.

If there’s no limit in the UK, then I can gripe about it, but at least the shop owner isn’t doing anything morally or legally wrong. Here in the US, that’s not the case - the shop owner is legally (from a civil standpoint) and morally in the wrong.

Using credit cards everywhere has several advantages, such as getting preferential foreign exchange rates (talk about a business based on shafting the customer!), not having to carry around great gobs of cash, getting insurance automatically on such things as air tickets, I can dispute bills in case of fraud and walk away from a bad deal, and of course I pay no annual fee, no interest, and get more than 2% cash back at the end of each year. That means I pay no more fee than someone using cash at the same stores, but each year I get back quite a bit more than $2000.

What is my incentive to use cash? In what manner have I been beguiled?

Maybe in a perfect world, all merchants would lower their prices if no credit cards existed, but I doubt it. Take for example my experience at the pizza place I worked at. We had a bad check rate that was anywhere from 7% to, some months, almost 20% (in terms of the face value of the checks). After collection efforts, etc., we typically lost from 4-12% of the face value - a complete write-off. That resulted in approximately a net loss to total sales for the store of about 8% annually. This does not include the person-time spent writing letters, filling out forms, sitting on the phone, etc. When they went to credit cards, that 3% fee represented a huge net savings, as it tended to replace check users, rather than cash users. Over time, I’m sure, it ate into the cash sales as well. But the hassle is greatly reduced, and, important to a business owner, the uncertainty and risk exposure is reduced. With cards, as long as the card is verified electronically, you know that you are looking at revenue, not potential revenue which must be adjusted downward by a variable amount depending upon whether a check is bad or not.

I contend it was the advent of checks which raised prices, and credit cards can, in many circumstances, result in reduced costs to a business. Maybe in the UK if someone writes a bad check you still get the money, I don’t know.

89

[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
(Price of product * percent of increase) + price of product= new price. Round up fractions of a penny.

When you became a shopkeeper, did you not know there would be math?
[/QUOTE]

This might just about work for loose products.

Otherwise, I am hardly going to be pricing £1 products at £1.01, 10 pence products at 11p, 95 becoming 96 etc. Some products, such as magazines/newspapers, or some food and drink have prices printed on them by their manufacturer.

And you are continually ignoring the minimum fee for taking credit cards. It is this, not the percentage cut, that is my gripe. If it was just a percentage fee, for what reason would I have a minimum order?

90

[QUOTE=Una Persson]
And that’s my point - most folks here are complaining about the times when there is a contract in place, and the business is willfully choosing to violate it. Seriously, if a business owner has a contract with suppliers, subcontractors, or even their cleaning crew, they would squeal like a stuck pig if they people they dealt with decided ad hoc which parts of the contracts they would or would not obey.

If there’s no limit in the UK, then I can gripe about it, but at least the shop owner isn’t doing anything morally or legally wrong. Here in the US, that’s not the case - the shop owner is legally (from a civil standpoint) and morally in the wrong.

Using credit cards everywhere has several advantages, such as getting preferential foreign exchange rates (talk about a business based on shafting the customer!), not having to carry around great gobs of cash, getting insurance automatically on such things as air tickets, I can dispute bills in case of fraud and walk away from a bad deal, and of course I pay no annual fee, no interest, and get more than 2% cash back at the end of each year. That means I pay no more fee than someone using cash at the same stores, but each year I get back quite a bit more than $2000.

What is my incentive to use cash? In what manner have I been beguiled?

Maybe in a perfect world, all merchants would lower their prices if no credit cards existed, but I doubt it. Take for example my experience at the pizza place I worked at. We had a bad check rate that was anywhere from 7% to, some months, almost 20% (in terms of the face value of the checks). After collection efforts, etc., we typically lost from 4-12% of the face value - a complete write-off. That resulted in approximately a net loss to total sales for the store of about 8% annually. This does not include the person-time spent writing letters, filling out forms, sitting on the phone, etc. When they went to credit cards, that 3% fee represented a huge net savings, as it tended to replace check users, rather than cash users. Over time, I’m sure, it ate into the cash sales as well. But the hassle is greatly reduced, and, important to a business owner, the uncertainty and risk exposure is reduced. With cards, as long as the card is verified electronically, you know that you are looking at revenue, not potential revenue which must be adjusted downward by a variable amount depending upon whether a check is bad or not.

I contend it was the advent of checks which raised prices, and credit cards can, in many circumstances, result in reduced costs to a business. Maybe in the UK if someone writes a bad check you still get the money, I don’t know.
[/QUOTE]

Cheques are a hassle too, yes! But we don’t get bounced cheques, by dint of where we are located.

The contract would not be enforceable in the UK because that portion would be held to be unfair (in part because of the relative sizes/power of the two parties). It would suprise me if the situation was different in the US as both follow the common law tradition. Pure speculation: This could be a reason Visa doesn’t seem to be enforcing it.

However, if it were in my contract, I would personally accept Visa for any purchase. But I would put up notices around the shop informing people that I would honour their credit card, but it would be losing money and I was doing them a favour, perhaps they could do me one by putting a pound in the charity box.

91

[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
There is nothing in our contract to stop me from imposing a minimum order, and I assure you that if there were then it would not be enforceable under British law.
[/QUOTE]
Really?

British contract law would prevent two parties from entering into a contract whereby one party agrees that, in order to have access to the other party’s system of credit cards, no minimum fee will be imposed on purchases made with that credit card?

I’d like to see some evidence that such a contract would be “unenforceable under British law.”

92

[QUOTE=Rigamarole]
Interest and fees go to the bank that issues your card, not to Visa or MC.
[/QUOTE]

I doubt that Visa and Mastercard allow issuing banks to use their logos for free.

93

[QUOTE=mhendo]
Really?

British contract law would prevent two parties from entering into a contract whereby one party agrees that, in order to have access to the other party’s system of credit cards, no minimum fee will be imposed on purchases made with that credit card?

I’d like to see some evidence that such a contract would be “unenforceable under British law.”
[/QUOTE]

I can’t give you a direct cite, but you might want to begin by googling “Yianni V Edwin Evans and Sons”

One of the consequences of this case (or more accurately something that was clarified by the sitting judge) was that equality of bargaining powers can be taken into account when judging the fairness of a clause in a contract.

I would be suprised if there was not an American equivilant.

94

[QUOTE=neutron star]
Either way, I was forcibly removed from a place of business for asking them to follow the rules that they’d already agreed to.
[/QUOTE]

So instead of losing 61¢ to Visa they lost $9 when they threw you out without requiring that you pay?

95

[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
What is obvious is that not all purchases use credit cards. Spread the 2.9% across all purchases, and you get a fraction of one percent. I should have thought a merchant would know this.
[/QUOTE]

Hey! Why should I, who is willing to carry cash for small purchases, have to pay more ALL THE TIME, no matter if I’m buying 100 bucks worth of stuff, just so YOU (who apparently can’t handle the task of keeping a few bucks in your pocket) can use a credit card for your pack of gum? Sheesh.

Get a debit card, why don’t you?

96

[QUOTE=StarvingButStrong]
Hey! Why should I, who is willing to carry cash for small purchases, have to pay more ALL THE TIME, no matter if I’m buying 100 bucks worth of stuff, just so YOU (who apparently can’t handle the task of keeping a few bucks in your pocket) can use a credit card for your pack of gum? Sheesh.

Get a debit card, why don’t you?
[/QUOTE]
Because offering credit cards is a cost of doing business, liking having a phone in your shop. Do you think you deserve a lower price because you didn’t call to ask directions?

97

[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
I can’t give you a direct cite, but you might want to begin by googling “Yianni V Edwin Evans and Sons”

One of the consequences of this case (or more accurately something that was clarified by the sitting judge) was that equality of bargaining powers can be taken into account when judging the fairness of a clause in a contract.

I would be suprised if there was not an American equivilant.
[/QUOTE]
I’m sure there is some sort of American equivalent.

The question, though, is not whether there is a law dealing with equality of bargaining powers; the question is whether such a law would work to prohibit credit card companies from requiring their merchants to process all transactions, no matter how small. You’re the one who has made the assertion that such a requirement would be “unenforceable under British law,” so i assume you can mount a persuasive argument, based on the relevant law, that would demonstrate this to be the case.

98

[QUOTE=NinjaChick]
Is the implication of the ad that credit cards are faster? I’ve never had a CC transaction go faster than cash.
[/QUOTE]
I think the ad referring to “speedy CC transactions” are reffering to a newer system. There are new CCs coming out that have those RFID proximity chip things. You just wave your card near the chip reader. It works in a similar manner as the Dexitsystem.

I thinkVisa calls it “Visa Contactless” and it’s designed specifically for small-ticket purchases at fast-food restaurants, movie theaters, and convenience stores. I’m pretty sure the commercials do show someone buying coffee at a donut shop and using the Visa contactless card.

MasterCard is testing a similar one with McDonald’s. It’s called PayPass. And American Express is launching one called ExpressPay.

99

[QUOTE=mhendo]
I’m sure there is some sort of American equivalent.

The question, though, is not whether there is a law dealing with equality of bargaining powers; the question is whether such a law would work to prohibit credit card companies from requiring their merchants to process all transactions, no matter how small. You’re the one who has made the assertion that such a requirement would be “unenforceable under British law,” so i assume you can mount a persuasive argument, based on the relevant law, that would demonstrate this to be the case.
[/QUOTE]

In all honesty I cannot offer you a concrete ciation, because the issue has never arisen. It is based on gut feeling and experience. In a way, my post is is my cite.

But I think the fact that we don’t have these agreements in the UK is pretty telling in itself. Let me assure you that if the banks could be implementing them, then they would!

100

[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.]
So instead of losing 61¢ to Visa they lost $9 when they threw you out without requiring that you pay?
[/QUOTE]

Yup. The bartender poured out the drinks and asked the bouncer to toss me out on my ass.

“Am I to understand that I’m being kicked out simply because I asked you to abide by the merchant agreement that your business willingly entered into?” I asked the bouncer.

“Look, I don’t know why I’m throwing you out. All I know is that you’re not welcome back here tonight.”

A friend who hadn’t witnessed the incident called me up later that night and asked what the hell happened. When I told him, I found out that the bartender was offering up a very different story to anyone who asked her about it (it’s a small town; though I don’t go to that bar often, most of the people there know me anyway). She didn’t mention the Visa thing to any of them, but instead told them that I was kicked out for being a belligerent drunk, something that should come as a surprise to anyone who actually knows me.

In reality, I had calmly and rationally stated my case and asked her to give Visa a call if she didn’t believe me (“I ain’t got time for that.”). I didn’t once raise my voice or act like a dick, and for the simple reason that I asked a company to follow the rules they’d already agreed to, my character was wrongfully impugned for the rest of the night to anyone who would listen.

Needless to say, I am beyond pissed off. :mad: