Minimum spend of €10 in order to use debit card @ The Academy?

Wikipedia is not a source, however it does not back up what you say and does back up what I'm saying - valid for a financial obligation. A retail purchase is not a financial obligation - as a bit of that post you didn't bold and presumably didn't read even says! Shops are not required to take cash.

Legal tender is solely a concept for the payment of debts. It is irrelevant to the discussion here entirely. Retailers are also not required to take cards

L1011 wrote: »

Legal tender is only a concept in debt payments, not retail transactions. Shops are not required to take cash

I'm bewildered why you'd take such a stance.

I suggest doing some research on the subject. You'll find you are mistaken

Perhaps you have a link?

Legal tender is a medium of payment recognized by a legal system to be valid for meeting a financial obligation.[1] Paper currency and coins are common forms of legal tender in many countries. Legal tender is variously defined in different jurisdictions. Formally, it is anything which when offered in payment extinguishes the debt. Thus, personal cheques, credit cards, and similar non-cash methods of payment are not usually legal tender. The law does not relieve the debt obligation until payment is tendered. Coins and banknotes are usually defined as legal tender. Some jurisdictions may forbid or restrict payment made other than by legal tender. For example, such a law might outlaw the use of foreign coins and bank notes or require a license to perform financial transactions in a foreign currency.
Generally, designation of a particular form of money as legal tender means "that the designated money is valid payment for all debts unless there is a specific agreement to the contrary".[2] In some jurisdictions legal tender can be refused as payment if no debt exists prior to the time of payment (where the obligation to pay may arise at the same time as the offer of payment). For example, vending machines and transport staff do not have to accept the largest denomination of banknote. Shopkeepers may reject large banknotes: this is covered by the legal concept known as invitation to treat.I][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_clarify"]clarification needed[/URL][/I Under the law, United States money as identified above is a valid and legal offer of payment for antecedent debts when tendered to a creditor. By contrast, federal statutes do not require that someone who is not a pre-existing creditor must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services. Private businesses may formulate their own policies on whether to accept cash unless state law requires otherwise.[3][4]
The right, in many jurisdictions, of a trader to refuse to do business with any person, means a purchaser may not insist on making a purchase and so declaring a legal tender in law, as anything other than an offered payment for debts already incurred would not be effective.

Legal tender is only a concept in debt payments, not retail transactions. Shops are not required to take cash

Antique school books are not a reliable source of information!

L1011 wrote: »

That isn't what Legal Tender means

It's exactly what legal tender is. The meaning hasn't changed in the last 40 years or so. Our currency has changed but not the meaning of legal tender

Official currency

The euro is the single currency shared by European Union countries that have adopted the euro. Some EU countries do not participate (Denmark and the United Kingdom through 'opt outs') or have not adopted the euro yet because the convergence criteria to join the euro are not met.
Official currencies, including the euro, consist in a monetary system designed and controlled by a state or, as regards the euro, by supranational structures.
Within the euro area, only the euro has the status of legal tender. Article 128 (1) TFEU lays down the legal tender status of euro banknotes, and article 11 of Regulation EC/974/98 does so with regard to euro coins. This means that in the absence of an agreement of the means of payment, the creditor is obliged to accept a payment made in euro which subsequently discharges the debtor from his payment obligation.
Yet, during transactions, contractual parties are free to use other official foreign currencies with legal tender status in the state of issuance (e.g. the pound sterling or the US dollar). The same applies to privately issued money like local exchange trading systems (e.g. voucher-based payment systems in certain communities) or virtual currency schemes (e.g. Bitcoin). Although these are not official currencies and have no legal tender status, parties can agree to use them as private money without prejudice to the official currency. In that way, these forms of private money can be considered as economic assets. Private money transactions and business are subject to the general rules of commodity trade such as taxation law, business law, anti-money laundering law or others. However, they are not official currencies and they are not governed by monetary law.

Notes & coins are legal tender. Cards are not legal tender

It's been many decades since I sat down in 2nd year with a commerce book but I do remember that Irish Punts was legal tender at the time. You always have the right to refuse admission (a transaction/ sale/ customer) but if you accepted a the sale then Punts was legal tender. You can't refuse legal tender. They even went into how many pennies, shillings etc you had to accept. You might have had to accept 100 pennies but there was a cut off point. You didn't have to accept 1000 pennies.

Cards are not legal tender. Shop can accept a sale & must accept Euro coins & notes as part of the sale but does not have to accept cards

That isn't what Legal Tender means

_Brian wrote: »

I avoid business that add this charge.

Went into local filling station for a drum of petrol for lawnmower, came to €7.

I only had card and they had introduced this stupid €10 min spend, conversation as follows.

Sorry €10 min spend on card

Sorry, I’ve no cash.

Buy something else.

No I don’t want anything else

Why not do the lotto?

I don’t do the lotto.

Well it’s €10 min spend

Grand, where do I leave back the petrol ?

What ?, you can’t

Ok so, I’ll come back tomorrow and pay?

No, we don’t give credit

I’m not looking for credit I want to pay but you won’t take the money!

Can you wait and let these other people go so we can sort this out ?

No it’s my turn!

Fine, I’ll put it through for €7

You do realize that a dick thing to do & you would be totally in the wrong.

Cards aren't legal tender. Cash is legal tender but not cards. Regardless what signs are in the shop they do not have to accept your card at all. They do have to accept cash

Johnny Red Cab

I admire his gumption in persisting against a stupid policy.

tomwaits48

_Brian wrote: »

I avoid business that add this charge.

Went into local filling station for a drum of petrol for lawnmower, came to €7.

I only had card and they had introduced this stupid €10 min spend, conversation as follows.

Sorry €10 min spend on card

Sorry, I’ve no cash.

Buy something else.

No I don’t want anything else

Why not do the lotto?

I don’t do the lotto.

Well it’s €10 min spend

Grand, where do I leave back the petrol ?

What ?, you can’t

Ok so, I’ll come back tomorrow and pay?

No, we don’t give credit

I’m not looking for credit I want to pay but you won’t take the money!

Can you wait and let these other people go so we can sort this out ?

No it’s my turn!

Fine, I’ll put it through for €7

jesus, people who man the tills at fillings stations have enough crap to deal with. take it up with the management.

Irish_peppa

cavemeister wrote: »

I dropped into a bar in Douglas, Cork for a pint a few weeks ago while the other half was having a spa treatment. Ordered a pint - €5.50 or thereabouts.

Handed over my debit card and the barman said minimum was €10 per transaction.

I put my card back into my wallet and walked out leaving the freshly poured pint on the bar counter. It was during the day so the pub was pretty quiet.

Went into another bar across the road who had no minimum for purchases and enjoyed a pint there.

If everyone did this, pubs and shops would soon drop this stupid self inflicted rule.

Im gonna do this today in my local petrol station when im putting 5 euros worth of petrol in the car:D

_Brian

I avoid business that add this charge.

Went into local filling station for a drum of petrol for lawnmower, came to €7.

I only had card and they had introduced this stupid €10 min spend, conversation as follows.

Sorry €10 min spend on card

Sorry, I’ve no cash.

Buy something else.

No I don’t want anything else

Why not do the lotto?

I don’t do the lotto.

Well it’s €10 min spend

Grand, where do I leave back the petrol ?

What ?, you can’t

Ok so, I’ll come back tomorrow and pay?

No, we don’t give credit

I’m not looking for credit I want to pay but you won’t take the money!

Can you wait and let these other people go so we can sort this out ?

No it’s my turn!

Fine, I’ll put it through for €7

eagle eye

If you can't get good rates then don't have those machines. If enough people refuse to have them they'll get offered a much better deal to get them on.

Personally I was gone pretty much cashless but have recently reverted to cash. There are too many people that know too much about you if you are using a card constantly. I value my privacy.

fritzelly wrote:

As already mentioned, if some private company can do 2.5% charges there is no excuses for someone who has a merchant account to get even better rates We are slowly moving to a cashless society, last time I used cash was for a kebab and even they do contactless Local shop used to charge a few for under 10 charges, i mentioned it to them that its cheaper than lodging cash, the charge is now gone and no minimum amount for debit cards

I've tried to explain several times that the good rates aren't available to everyone no matter what company you use. I refunded someone for the first time last month only to discover that I get charged 5 euros if I refund someone.

I can't stress this enough. Not everyone is on good rates and not everyone can get good rates. I think it is very wrong of posters to assume what rates a particular company pays.

As already mentioned, if some private company can do 2.5% charges there is no excuses for someone who has a merchant account to get even better rates
We are slowly moving to a cashless society, last time I used cash was for a kebab and even they do contactless
Local shop used to charge a few for under 10 charges, i mentioned it to them that its cheaper than lodging cash, the charge is now gone and no minimum amount for debit cards

mrcheez

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I hear you & don't disagree. I'm not defending minimum spend. I'm really just trying to show that some small businesses pay set transaction fees and would lose money on a 3 euro transaction.

My main business is shower repair and installation. I'm looking at dropping the card machine all together tbh. My IBAN is on my invoice and a lot of clients transfer. This can save me a lot of money. Card fees were over 60 euros in December. That's nearly a fill of diesel for me.

The Academy is not a small business and should easily be able to foot the charges considering how overpriced their drinks are.

L1011 wrote:

When you're already in a venue, you are rather limited by the arbitrary requirement. And places don't advertise that they're living in the past from outside.

I hear you & don't disagree. I'm not defending minimum spend. I'm really just trying to show that some small businesses pay set transaction fees and would lose money on a 3 euro transaction.

My main business is shower repair and installation. I'm looking at dropping the card machine all together tbh. My IBAN is on my invoice and a lot of clients transfer. This can save me a lot of money. Card fees were over 60 euros in December. That's nearly a fill of diesel for me.

When you're already in a venue, you are rather limited by the arbitrary requirement. And places don't advertise that they're living in the past from outside.

L1011 wrote:

How old was the BOIPA agreement?

I left BOIPA about 6 months ago.

Here's something to think about. While I was with BOIPA I was paying 50c & 75c per transaction. I never had minimum transaction as my average was 350 per transaction. While I was paying these fees another poster was with the same company paying something ridiculous like .12 percent debit card and 7c credit card. I'm with the same company at the same time but can't get anywhere near the same deal. I have a better deal now .5 debit & .75 credit. It doesn't matter what company I go to I won't be able to get much better. Its easy to say that these companies should go get a better deal. That option isn't available for the small business.

L1011 wrote:

Your defences for retailers simply do not stack up - they can modernise (saving themselves money in the process) or eventually get put out of business due to sticking with the past. Consumers should not have to suffer due to retailers stuck in the past.

Consumers don't have to suffer. They have legs & can shop elsewhere. This is the greatest consumer tool you have. It's like a filling station. You don't have to go to the expensive ones.

I've no skin in this. I don't use contactless on my cards nor can my clients use contactless with me as the transactions are in the hundreds. I'm just explaining that many posters are incorrect. I'm explaining why some shops have a minimum order. I'm not saying minimum order is a good thing. Just explaining why it is.

As for it being against the t&cs why not report the shop in question? I bet in 6 months time they will still have a minimum order despite the complaint.

How old was the BOIPA agreement?

Both card brandnames provide functions to report retailers doing it - I imagine they would be quite annoyed with a downstream provider who are not enforcing it

Your defences for retailers simply do not stack up - they can modernise (saving themselves money in the process) or eventually get put out of business due to sticking with the past. Consumers should not have to suffer due to retailers stuck in the past.

The An Post analogy simply doesn't work - there is a major practical differences in the service provided to the consumer with shipment options and people will often opt for mail. With cards, there is no practical difference.

fritzelly wrote:

Mastercard and Visa do not allow it as part of the contract, you can even report retailers doing it.

If the merchant charges a flat fee the retailer is allowed to charge minimum transaction. This is definitely not against the rules. I was told this by BOI card services. They activity tell retailers that they can do this. It was not in my t&cs with BOI. I'd imagine the t&cs you are looking at are for percentage fees rather than set fees.

I've been to many countries where there is not only a minimum fee but also a charge to use you card in the shop. I was in Egypt last November and its very common there.

As a retailer I don't have any contract with Visa or Mastercard. I had a contract with BOI and now have a contract with Ecomm.

fritzelly wrote:

Again another issue with the merchant - they should be updating in real time. Don't think I've ever had a contactless payment not show up immediately and even so there is still a limit of how much you can spend per day before a pin is needed.

A young student old has one euro in his account. He can make several contactless transactions in the day. They don't have to amount to much. Let's say 5 cups of coffee throughout the day at 3 euros per cup. He could be hit with over 20 in fees and fines. It's not that he'd be hundreds in debt, its the charges that the bank makes on him.

Cards & contactless payments are grand when you are flush but they allow you to spend money that you don't have. This is a mojor issue for some school going students. Yet the banks are happy with the status quo.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Don't like the minimum purchase? Move on. Shop elsewhere. Despite what some posters believe the minimum transaction is not illegal not does it break any banking rules.

Mastercard and Visa do not allow it as part of the contract, you can even report retailers doing it.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The real consumer issue as far as contactless payment is concerned is the fact that banks let you spend money you don't have then charge fees & fines often higher than the cost of the original transaction. Young people in particular are being taken advantage of in this way. If you use chip & pin you can only use money in your account. Contactless payments allow minors to get into debt. I'm amazed there hasn't been a prime time investigation into the practice. As far as I remember it's illegal for a bank to loan minors money.

Again another issue with the merchant - they should be updating in real time.
Don't think I've ever had a contactless payment not show up immediately and even so there is still a limit of how much you can spend per day before a pin is needed.

L1011 wrote:

They don't "have" to charge it - they are entirely capable of changing upstream provider.

That's easy saying that but some are tied into 18 and 24 month contracts. They also have a right to stick with the company they have been using for 20 years or more. Some shop owners believe that they have to stay with their provider because its linked to their bank.

I have a small mail order company & I only use An Post for delivery. Other delivery companies are cheaper. I pass on the extra An Post charge to my customers. My customers have the option of paying or going elsewhere. My customers don't have the right to make me use another delivery service. Its the same in shops. Don't like the minimum purchase? Move on. Shop elsewhere. Despite what some posters believe the minimum transaction is not illegal not does it break any banking rules.

They don't "have" to charge it - they are entirely capable of changing upstream provider.

L1011 wrote:

Realistically, consumers don't care and should have to care that the retailer is stuck using poor quality suppliers. And that's the purpose of the forum here.

I'm not taking sides. I'm just explaining why some shops charge a minimum transaction fee. The vast majority of posters don't seem to understand that many retailers have to charge minimum transaction.

The real consumer issue as far as contactless payment is concerned is the fact that banks let you spend money you don't have then charge fees & fines often higher than the cost of the original transaction. Young people in particular are being taken advantage of in this way. If you use chip & pin you can only use money in your account. Contactless payments allow minors to get into debt. I'm amazed there hasn't been a prime time investigation into the practice. As far as I remember it's illegal for a bank to loan minors money.

Realistically, consumers don't care and should have to care that the retailer is stuck using poor quality suppliers. And that's the purpose of the forum here.

fritzelly wrote:

Because they think it's still 1990

Yes.

It doesn't matter what their reason is. It is a fact that many people refuse to change & pay dearly for it in the long run. Many posts here make no sense. Stating that everyone pays 25c per transaction or a tiny percentage isn't true. The reality is that just about every shop pays different rates, fees and commissions. You can't assume that a shop is getting a certain deal.

I can think of absolutely no reason why a shop would have a minimum spend if they were on a percentage rather than a set fee. When on a set fee you need a minimum spend

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'll say it one more time: why would any retailer set a minimum order amount if they are only paying a percentage..

Because they think it's still 1990
Debit cards are capped at 0.1%, if you are paying 75c on top of that then you are mad