During a delivery today I was paying the driver using my credit card and
gave my Chip and Signature card. He insisted on phoning the depot and I paid
over the phone.

I was told that if he accepted a chip and signature card the charges were 3%
more than for a chip and PIN card.

Anyone able to confirm or deny that banks are charging more for businesses
that accept chip and sig cards?

--
mark BR

In article , Mark BR
writes
During a delivery today I was paying the driver using my credit card and
gave my Chip and Signature card. He insisted on phoning the depot and I paid
over the phone.

I was told that if he accepted a chip and signature card the charges were 3%
more than for a chip and PIN card.

Anyone able to confirm or deny that banks are charging more for businesses
that accept chip and sig cards?

It sounds like the usual lack of understanding of chip and sig. For a
transaction put though on a terminal I can see no way that a different
fee could arise but they may say that they were unable to process it on
a terminal and so their costs were higher as a result, or that risks
were higher in the mistaken assumption that it was actually a chip no
pin transaction.

For Mastercard the rules are suitably vague stating that costs, "must
bear a reasonable relationship to the Merchant’s cost of accepting
Cards", so that may be their get out.

This from:

http://www.mastercard.com/uk/merchan...ant_rules.html

10A.3 Charges to Cardholders
Rule 5.9.2 does not apply in the European Economic Area.
If a Merchant applies a surcharge for payment by Card, the amount or
method
of calculation of the surcharge must be clearly indicated to the
Cardholder at
the POI location and must bear a reasonable relationship to the
Merchant’s
cost of accepting Cards.

Not very helpful I'm afraid but I've found the rules useful for ironing
out other chip & sig related discrimination.
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs