Visa Won't Require Signatures, a Move Wal-Mart Long Sought

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
In a change that many consider overdue, Visa, the US’s largest card network, is eliminating signatures for purchases made with an EMV chip card or contactless payment method. MasterCard, American Express, and Discover have already announced their plans to adopt this policy, which is expected to begin in April.

Merchants have campaigned for years to ditch signatures because those sales are routed through systems with fees more than double those for transactions using personal identification numbers, or PINs. Visa is the last of the major US payments networks to ease the signature requirement.
 
Signature on payment is still a thing? Who'd a thunk it. I haven't used a signature for years on my mastercard here.
 
I prefer signatures, when I'm buying stuff. The PIN is for the bank, when I'm getting cash out of the ATM. Yep, I still use cash. Oh, and get the hell off of my lawn. :oldman:
 
When we get to a point where I can walk in, get what I want, and walk out - no signatures required, no payments, no lines, nothing - let me know. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhoMe
like this
In regards to security, Europe has been using chip AND PIN for many years. PIN is for security, not just your checking account. I've already had several fraudulent purchases over the years by jerks who somehow got my credit card info.

No one checks sigs, and even if they did---who trained them and with what credentials?
 
When we get to a point where I can walk in, get what I want, and walk out - no signatures required, no payments, no lines, nothing - let me know. :D
I keep waiting and waiting for this, always seems just around the corner, like "the" cure for baldness.
 
Requiring a signature has never prevented any fraudulent usage of my credit cards. Good riddance.
No but if you decide to commit a fraudulent act against your credit card company by saying "I didn't buy that" there's a signature that said you agreed to pay for said goods at a later date (and probably a video tape somewhere which shows you signing)
 
No but if you decide to commit a fraudulent act against your credit card company by saying "I didn't buy that" there's a signature that said you agreed to pay for said goods at a later date (and probably a video tape somewhere which shows you signing)


Most banks never take it that far. It's just easier to write it off.

The reason Visa resisted chip and pin was because they were afraid of their users forgetting the pin, which happened when a bank in Canada sent out the initial letters too early so most of their members didn't remember them. There's also is nothing stopping them from being used as ATM cards as long as they still have magnetic strips.
 
Signature on payment is still a thing? Who'd a thunk it. I haven't used a signature for years on my mastercard here.

Every time I get a brand new card at work, the first use doesn't require any PIN (using chip) and ask for signature...
Odd but it seems it's like that... every other use ask for PIN and no signature.
 
I can't remember the last time a cashier actually looked at the signature.
 
Wal-Mart already skips the signature on my Discover card. Lowes skips it for smaller purchases. The quality of signatures obtained on those low res signing pads mounted at odd angles in hard to reach places probably limits use as legal proof anyway. Several times I have had to sign finger paint style since the stylus was missing.
 
Every time I get a brand new card at work, the first use doesn't require any PIN (using chip) and ask for signature...
Odd but it seems it's like that... every other use ask for PIN and no signature.

Our new cards are must use first transaction with a pin, then after that can use chip and pin or just pay wave it. The only time to sign for anything is when receiving parcels as registered post, even then I just initial, I haven't actually properly signed for anything in like forever. :)
 
Most banks never take it that far. It's just easier to write it off.

The reason Visa resisted chip and pin was because they were afraid of their users forgetting the pin, which happened when a bank in Canada sent out the initial letters too early so most of their members didn't remember them. There's also is nothing stopping them from being used as ATM cards as long as they still have magnetic strips.
Exactly the reason why big CC companies don't care about that level of security, so you get your credit card info swiped, CC company simply charges it back, the people who really lose money are the vendors who accepted said CC payment. Basically it costs them more money to implement than they'll lose to fraud.
 
You would think the US would be faster on this stuff. Here in Canada I can't remember the last time I had to sign a CC slip. For that matter its been a few years since I had to use a pin either at all but the most broke ass burger joint. :) Haven't had to use a pin on my bank card in even longer.

Some US retailers here are slow adopting change.... Walmart for instance is constantly fighting with the CC companies over rates. I don't go there often myself but I think they have refused to take one of the majors over rates on their end. Last time I was there a few months ago I noticed they still have the ancient dino chip readers that don't support tap to pay. So you can still get stuck behind the old person at wally world who can't remember that damn pin.... and I imagine now its worse that they just tap everywhere else.
 
Signatures are pointless. The new machines sometiimes won't accept the stylus, and I wind up using my knuckle to make some sort of mark on the signature line. Accepted every single time, no matter how bizarre it looks.
Signatures mean nothing when used this way. What really protects you at these big box stores is the video record of who is making the purchase. CCTV cameras are everywhere.
 
Back
Top