PDA

View Full Version : Is Cash No Longer Legal Tender?


Pages : [1] 2 3

Jubilee21
April 25th, 2008, 01:30 PM
Paying Cash? That'll Cost Extra
4/25/08

Rhonda Payne went to an AT&T Wireless store in Calhoun, Ga., recently to pay her phone bill in cash. She'd been hit by ID theft and was forced to close her checking account, so she was worried she wouldn’t be able to mail a check on time. But when she arrived at the store, she was in for a surprise.

Paying in person, she was told, costs extra -- $2 extra.

Payne objected to the "administrative charge" that was added to her bill but got no sympathy. Instead, she said, she was told she should consider herself lucky because the fee was about to go up to $5.

"I was told that it was a courtesy to take cash,” she said. “I said, ‘Are you kidding me?'”

It’s no joke. Beginning earlier this year, AT&T Wireless began to charge customers who pay their bills in their stores.

"It is a way of saving money ... it helps us keep our costs lower," said AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel. "We want our associates to spend their time helping customers as they are thinking about their wireless plans or looking at phones."

There are multiple ways for consumers to pay their bills for free, he added -- in the mail, by electronic payment and on the Web. There are even kiosks in stores where bill payments can be dropped off for free. But having a sales clerk take the payment costs extra.

"If someone really wants to pay using the service of a representative, we think it's appropriate to assess this fee," Siegel said.

The fee might remind some of the "talk-to-a-teller" fee introduced by First National Bank of Chicago in 1995. Siegel said such fees are routine in other industries, too, citing credit cards as an example.

In fact, most credit card issuers do charge a similar fee, called "pay-to-pay." Consumers who call up banks to pay their credit card bills -- often at the last minute to avoid interest charges or late fees – often are assessed "pay-to-pay" fees ranging from $5 to $15. The practice has recently drawn scrutiny in Congress, and a credit card reform bill introduced by Sen. Carl Levin , D-Mich., would ban the practice.

Hurts the poor most

Consumer advocate Ed Mierzwinski, director of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, said he's concerned about AT&T's new fee for another reason: It hits poor people hardest because they are most likely to pay in stores.

"It's targeted at people who don't have bank accounts,” he said. “...It's punitive and largely indefensible."

"It's just unfair to me and I'm shocked by it. People that have less money have to pay more to pay their bills. … It hurts people that really don't have a choice."

Studies show that 10 million to 12 million Americans don't have bank accounts and have to pay their bills in cash, he said. Some are undocumented workers; others are consumers who have bounced too many checks in the past and are ineligible for checking accounts. Sometimes called the "unbanked," consumers who live in this cash economy are finding it harder and harder to maintain basic services, Mierzwinski said.

"I think (AT&T’s fee) is going to lead to more companies charging more to people who want to pay with cash," he said.

Siegel denied that AT&T was targeting cash customers and said his company offers pay-as-you-go pre-paid phones that are better suited for consumers who want to pay in cash. Payne has complained to state regulators and to the Federal Communications Commission, but hasn't received a refund -- or an explanation that satisfies her.

"This fee charged by AT&T is ripping off poor people," she said. "I've told everybody I know about this."

http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/04/paying-cash-at.html#po


Don't know if folks have run into this but I have on many occasions..I refuse to use credit cards, just a personal thingy of mine..and I will always pay cash, I don't think I have written a check either in almost 18 mos., I go directly to the offices of folks I do business with as a first choice.

Thoughts?

stonewallfan
April 25th, 2008, 03:07 PM
Reminds me of those very annoying visa commercials people dancing and prancing then someone wants to pay cash and everything stops and people give the offender the stink eye he then finds his visa, or completes his purchase then everything goes back to the up tempo.

HSmomto4
April 25th, 2008, 03:21 PM
It is paving the way for the MOB. My husband and I gone back to cash this last month. We leave the money we need to pay bills in our account, but then take everything else out so we don't leave any money in our account. I'm afraid of the banks going under and not getting our money for months and I couldn't wait that long. I'm waiting though for more places to go cashless or enforce a fee if you want to pay in cash, especially as the paper dollar looses value.

Whiplash
April 25th, 2008, 03:48 PM
Reminds me of those very annoying visa commercials people dancing and prancing then someone wants to pay cash and everything stops and people give the offender the stink eye he then finds his visa, or completes his purchase then everything goes back to the up tempo.

Which is exactly the opposite of reality, at this point. I know they hope it will someday be like that everywhere, but generally, using a debit card stops the carnival.

agga40s
April 25th, 2008, 05:46 PM
I am not at all shocked by this - first time it happened to me was 25 years ago when I wanted to pay a hotel bill in cash. I didn't have a credit card at the time, and the policy of the hotel was not to accept cash. Since we had no other option, the hotel finally agreed for me to buy traveler's checks for way over the amount of the bill, which the hotel management held onto until I checked out. At the time, I felt like I was in the twilight zone. But nothing surprises me now.

I wonder if they would impose the same charge if the person had been paying with a money order? No matter, really, since it's simply irrational that anyone would be charged for paying a bill in legal tender.

"We want our associates to spend their time helping customers as they are thinking about their wireless plans or looking at phones."

There is the crux of the matter, and I'm a little surprised their statement is quite so bold and well, truthful. They don't want to spend any money collecting on what they've already sold...they want their "associates" to spend all their time selling new products and services, and to heck with servicing customers who are already obligated to pay. Sheesh.

Jubilee21
April 25th, 2008, 05:51 PM
Personally I think it's a racket and should be challanged as unconstitutional and would love to see the ACLU jump in on this and make themselves useful:aha

I don't think you can maintain the logic that if someone who uses cash to pay a bill at a business where the service was contracted should be able to charge you a fee for that anymore than if you paid cash to buy an item they sold from them for that service.

I can see a transmital service fee say if you went to Wal Mart or Giant and paid your telephone bill there..but all of these other charges in the article are just obnoxious.

I just simply refused to use debit cards or credit cards on the principle my private info was being demanded and sold, same with checks..that infuriated me..same when I go to Pizza Hut and they ask me if I want the same thing I ordered before..I just give them made up phone numbers and zipcodes, etc.

I sometime lose track of which name I made up when they wanted one so they hello "Madonna or Mrs. Trump, what else can we do for you today..." and I look around to see who they are talking to...:aha

It's a futile to try to stay off the map as I am on disability and receive assistance but I figure I am an insignificant 'peon' in regard to how much that is threat or monitored..nor do I care..but I really hate the invasion of privacy with all the other stuff..

Am noticing some banks are even putting holds on payroll and other funds for a minimum of three days, and up to 10 days as well..sounds to me if they have a float going on to gobble up the interest at their end or cover their butts if they are over extended..

I would be real careful if that policy showed up at someone's bank..it may be a red flag they are in trouble.:thinking

Heartstorm
April 25th, 2008, 05:59 PM
I hate when you buy something and they ask your zip code !!! Hummm WHY ? they don't need my zip code and I refuse it. I also had my SS# removed from drivers license. They are not employing me they don't need my ss#. ANd when I took my daughter in for a ortho check to see if she needed braces. They gave me this long ole form and wanted credit info. I told them that I would not be charging her braces, I would pay for them if they were needed.
Well stop everything !! that was not an option :thinking Soooo I walked out.

I'm all 67X
April 25th, 2008, 07:50 PM
More conditioning, methinks.

whamo
April 25th, 2008, 09:48 PM
Something doesn't sound legal.
I own a small business and it is illegal for me to charge customers extra for using American Express (Amex charges me a higher rate than Visa/Mastercard). I can legally offer a discount for payment by cash, or payment by a preferred card but I can not charge extra for one I don't like. I believe this is part of UCC - Uniform Commercial Code which is federal.

Mrsppmrxky
April 26th, 2008, 09:57 AM
I think that they are going to probably put this up as another 'peace and security' issue. If you have lots of cash, you are open to being robbed. If you only have little paper receipts for debit and credit cards, there is really nothing that you can do.

I have always heard, haven't tried it, that if you go to pay a bill and they refuse payment, then the debt is null and void. Anyone know if this is true?