10-11-2006, 07:31 PM
|
#46 (permalink)
|
|
Deja Moo
Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA
|
As I mentioned in an early post, my employees use my credit cards for business expenses and fewer and fewer vendors are willing to accept that arrangement. The disagreement between Lady Sage and analog regarding the proper use of credit cards is an important enough issue for me personally to look into the matter further. For those that don't wish to dig out the various posts leading to this question, I have quoted them below followed by the comments given to me tonight from one of my card carriers, Chase.
Lady Sage #24
Quote:
RED LIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!
Signing your name for another persons credit card? Please dont ever do that again! He could have you thrown in jail for that if he wanted to! He could call the company and say he didnt sign for those purchases and THEY could come after you. Please protect yourself! Have your boss get you a card on his account with YOUR name on it if he wants you to do shopping for him.
|
This is true. If one of my employees signed his name using my card (as they currently do for business expenses), for two tickets to Bora Bora, I would have his ass in jail. If I were the type of person that could rationalize cheating the credit card company and let the employee take the blame, that employee is royally screwed. Lady Sage is correct.
Lady Sage #38
Quote:
|
Most retail stores print out the name on the card on the receipt. All that needs happen with this is one person in the back office to notice the signature is NOT the name on the card/receipt and call the card and report fraudulent activity. They will deactivate the card and start a fraud investigation.
|
Again, Lady Sage is correct. I suspect only a small number of transactions get caught at this point. I have been contacted by my card companies a number of times to verify a transaction as mine. Deactivation of the card would be instant, had I said 'no'.
analog #40
Quote:
|
Show me a law that makes putting something other than your name on the signature line illegal. Show me case law. Provide an example for this, please. ....snip...the above assertion strikes me as totally false. The signature is only there to give the merchant a bit of security. Defrauding the company would include denying the charge signed for by the fake name. The signature is between you and merchants only.
|
It is true that you can sign anything you wish, as long as you aren't doing so for fraudulent purposes. If you intentionally sign "Elmer Fudd" and then claim you have not authorized this purchase, you may or may not be pursued by the card issuer. Certainly the dollar amount and repeat activity of that kind would influence the course of action.
Lady Sage #43
Quote:
|
It is in your card holder agreement and seeing as how I do not know what cards you have I can not link you to their web sites. You want quotes I suggest you pull them out and read them word for word.
|
I pulled one of my cardholder agreements and my eyes glazed over reading throught the multiple pages of legalspeak. I called my card company for the information I was looking for.
analog #44
Quote:
All three persons I spoke to said that the signature is a security measure only, for the merchant, and is used to identify you as the cardholder. Along with proper ID, it doesn't matter what you sign on the paper or electronic device- it's up to the merchant to either accept it or not. While technically against the rules, they say, the rule is there simply for the protection of the merchant, to verify identity without having to submit an ID card. I also asked if it constituted fraud, and they all answered no. The Amercian Express rep pointed out that while the rule was to sign your own name, "I've never seen an account cancelled for it." I then said, "certainly if they are denying the charges?" to which she replied, "well if you made the purchase and then deny the charge, that is fraud no matter what you sign."
When asked if signing "Elmer Fudd" on a receipt could be unlawful or in any way legally actionable, the Mastercard rep said, "oh no, no.. absolutely not. it's just there for the retailer". The rep from Visa said, after she finished laughing, "no it's not illegal." The rep from American Express said, "unlawful? no no no..." to which I specifically said, "so if someone comes into my store and signs something false, like a fake name, that's not illegal, you can't be arrested for that or anything, right?" and he replied, "no, you can't get arrested... it's for you and the store... so they know you're the cardholder."
So there you go. Against cardholder rules? Sure. Why? As a security measure between you and the retailer. Fraud? No. Not illegal. Can't get arrested.
|
It is this post that sent me to my card company for clarification. My Chase representative assured me that the merchant is not held responsible for the use of a false name ie "Elmer Fudd" nor is it "illegal" to do so. But what is missing in this scenerio, once again, is the intension of the signer. If fraud is intended, it will be treated as fraud. If you want to be immature by using goofy names to amuse yourself, you risk the chance of sharp eyes catching it, and killing your card.
analog
Quote:
|
I'm glad that's cleared up for everyone.
|
So am I |
|
|