Ticket counters not accepting cash?

[PVD]

The IRS is not a business. It can set reasonable parameters as to which centers accept cash, it is not across the board. The memo linked explains pmta01942_7439.pdf (irs.gov)

The gov't created their own mess by trying to trap banks who processed large cash transactions that were the proceeds of Federally illegal businesses by threatening civil asset forfeitures and penalties. So the dealers had limited access to banking... Both the banks and the dealers followed the great American tradition of giving the IRS the finger.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

When was the last time you worked as a cashier? It’s no fun being questioned by your boss as though you’re stealing when you come to find out you forgot to check if there were any $100’s under the coin tray that day. Working as a cashier in a cashless environment is way easier and less pressure for a large number of reasons.

I've worked multiple cashier jobs and the register does nearly all the thinking for you. In fact the position of cashier has been simplified over and over to the point where an automated kiosk can handle nearly everything that's left.

It's not just that they made a mistake, unlike some people on this forum, but they may have been scammed, they may have been rushed, bills might have been stuck together, it might have been another employee skimming, even their register might have screwed up. But they get blamed and often shamed. even with an advanced degree in engineering, I have made mistakes in simple math - and more than once. I admire you for your better abilities.

So the problem was not that your boss was a jerk or that your skills were a poor match for working a register but that some businesses still allowed some customers to pay with cash? Therefore the fix was not for you to find another position that was a better match but to permanently restrict the payment options for everyone else on your behalf?

 

[Asher]

Which is why the first rule in Affairs 101 is always pay for hotel rooms in cash. (Not that I know from personal experience... )

Long gone are the days when I’ve paid cash for a hotel room. I now like to book in advance, not easy to do with cash.

 

[jis]

Long gone are the days when I’ve paid cash for a hotel room. I now like to book in advance, not easy to do with cash.

You could still pay in cash if you wish, or using some instrument other the one used for making the reservation though. The latter I have done many times, that is paid with a different credit card from the one that was used to guarantee the reservation.

 

[Asher]

You could still pay in cash if you wish, or using some instrument other the one used for making the reservation though. The latter I have done many times, that is paid with a different credit card from the one that was used to guarantee the reservation.

Yes, I have sometimes cashed it out when checking out. In fact, if it wasn’t for booking on line, car rentals and Uber, I never would have got an AMEX. Now days though, like they say, don’t leave home with out it.

 

[me_little_me]

Anyone who thinks Legal Tender Law means people have to accept cash is sadly mistaken. Go to the US Treasury webpages they will explain that what you think that section of the law means regarding any is not what it really is. Unless there is a local law to the contrary business are free to set payment terms, and you can agree to them or not use the service or complete the transaction. The only thing they can't do is not disclose in advance. Unless local law contradicts businesses are free to reject cash, reject coins, reject certain size bills, and if you don't like it, go elsewhere. It is a bit harsh in some cases, but it is reality.

"The only thing they can't do is not disclose in advance." I agree with that but that's because there is no debt at that point and no contract. They must post that condition of contract. So if you call an Amtrak agent and agree to pay at the station, at that point there is a tentative reservation but no debt and not a contract of service. Then you walk into the agent and see the sign or are told "no cash", then, again, there is no debt and no contract and you are not obligated to pay for the reservation.

Same for any other business if the notice precedes the debt. But if there is no sign and you eat the food (incurring a debt), then the proprietor says "no cash", then your quote governs the rule - they must accept it. That differs from credit cards as there is no inherent obligation to accept them. On the other hand, if you walk in to a store pick up an item and bring it to the counter (and there has been no sign or notice) and try to pay cash and they refuse, they have not violated your quoted rule as there is no debt yet and no contract of acceptance. You are free to leave without the item and without paying another way.

Edit:fix typo

 

[neroden]

Actually, no.

Actually, yes.

There is no contract law that has been upheld at the Federal level saying that debts are forgiven automatically because the creditor refuses to take cash.

Contract law is almost entirely state law. But in all 50 states, and for debts governed by federal law because they are not in any state or are related to the federal government directly, what I said is correct.

Tender is the presentation for acceptance. It means it is entirely legal to offer to pay in cash. Tender has never meant compulsory acceptance.

Yes, it does mean compulsory acceptance, or in the alternative, forgiveness of debt. That's what it means.

A legal tender in payment of the debt means an offer which is considered to satisfy the debt. If the creditor refuses such an offer, they are ipso facto forgiving the debt.

Look, I actually reviewed the law on this a while back; there were a series of late-19th/early-20th century short stories written by a lawyer with *legal citation footnotes*. I read the one about legal tender -- it's called "Legal Tender". I went through the citations because I was curious and so I effectively did the paralegal research. I checked: the caselaw hasn't changed. I have the legal tender law correct. This was confirmed in the marijuana cases recently.

As I said, it only applies to *debts* (a strong limitation) -- and only if the contract has not previously specified another form of payment, so that it simply amounts to a debt in "dollars", not otherwise specified. (This is the case with many but not all implied contracts.) You'd be surprised how rarely your transactions incur debt, and how much rarer it is for that to happen without specifying payment type; sit-down restaurants which have not posted a sign regarding acceptable forms of payment are one of the few common exceptions. me_little_me also understands this law, and you, Mr. Farr, do not.

 

[neroden]

https://www.denverpost.com/2015/03/...s-to-denver-pot-shop-that-pays-taxes-in-cash/
In 2015, IRS backed off before losing the case in court. They knew they were going to lose.

https://qz.com/1461947/the-irs-cant-handle-cannabis-companies-all-cash-tax-payments/
If you want the actual caselaw on legal tender, it's mostly from the 19th century, when the situation with money was very complicated.

One of the interesting points which has come up is that it is legal for the IRS to provide a limited, but reasonable, number of times and places to make your cash payment of taxes. It is not legal to limit the quantity of cash accepted, or to fine or penalize people for paying tax in cash.

If I dug harder, I would be able to find the news articles which I read while the cases were ongoing about the arguments filed in court in the marijuana tax payments cases, before the IRS surrendered -- or if I went to the library with LexisNexis I would start looking for the actual court filings again -- but they're somewhat hard to find with Google now, since it has a recency bias. I'm not going to spend the time on that right now, but you can if you want to.

 

[neroden]

https://www.accountingtoday.com/opi...hing-out-payments-from-the-marijuana-industry
Here's a statement from an accountant -- this is not controversial: "while the IRS is mandated to take tax payments in any form of legal tender, the high volume of cash coming in from taxed cannabis sales has proven difficult for the agency to handle."

 

[Nick Farr]

Contract law is almost entirely state law.

The usage of Federal currency is Federal law.

Yes, it does mean compulsory acceptance, or in the alternative, forgiveness of debt. That's what it means.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/tender
"To present to another person an unconditional offer to enter into a contract; a request for bids. 2) To present payment to another."

Can you actually cite a legal definition where tender mandates acceptance?

Look, I actually reviewed the law on this a while back; there were a series of late-19th/early-20th century short stories written by a lawyer with *legal citation footnotes*. I read the one about legal tender -- it's called "Legal Tender". I went through the citations because I was curious and so I effectively did the paralegal research. I checked: the caselaw hasn't changed. I have the legal tender law correct. This was confirmed in the marijuana cases recently.

Great, can you actually provide the citation?

Section 31 U.S.C. 5103 says all U.S. money is a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. Nowhere in USC 5013 or contract law does it say that debts are automatically rendered invalid for failure to accept cash.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htmhttps://www.expertlaw.com/library/consumer-protection/it-legal-refuse-cash-payment
In modern practice, for security and many other reasons, in the 21st century anyone can refuse to accept paper cash even if they entered into a contract where the payment method was not stated. The Federal Reserve is very clear on this.

Of course, States can do as they please. However, absent a state law to the contrary, failure to accept cash tendered never nullifies a contract or a debt, even the implied contract at a sit down restaurant.

Please actually provide any citation backing up anything you've said.

 

[neroden]

I'm not going to continue to argue with you unless you pay me for paralegal work. I'm right, you're wrong, I CAN dig up the citations, but I'm not here to do the paralegal work you're unwilling to do when you're in denial about the facts.

Failure to accept cash tendered under reasonable conditions, represents forgiveness of the debt.

Making a valid, legal tender offer for payment of debt and having the offer refused is forgiveness of the debt; this law is older than the United States. I realize you know *absolutely nothing* about US law, but please don't act like you do.

 

[neroden]

If you want to understand why your incorrect legal theory is so ridiculous that nobody takes it seriously, please note that if your theory was correct, your bank could refuse to accept your mortgage payment (done specified according to contract, or as a legal tender) and then claim that you had defaulted on the mortgage and try to foreclose. *That's not how it works*.

But crooked lenders *used to try to do that*.

The entirety of "tender in satisfaction of debt" law is about what the creditor *has to accept* -- it was developed hundreds of years ago in reaction to creditors who were trying to manufacture defaults dishonestly, and that's the entire line of cases.

There's actually a general principle that if the creditor refuses a valid, contract-compliant offer to pay what the debtor owes, the creditor is forgiving the debt; this is done to prevent former abuses by abusive creditors who were trying to manufacture defaults from people who were trying to pay their debts and had the money to do so. The courts frown on that. (THIS has come up during the robo-foreclosure cases in the years surrounding 2008; people have proven that their mortgage lender was refusing valid payments -- in those cases often checks and wire transfers, which were specified as valid by the lender -- and that proves that the payment was forgiven.) The legal tender laws are merely a special case.

 

[MIrailfan]

This thread has taken an interesting turn.

 

[plane2train]

If elementary school math is a "huge burden" to a working age employee maybe they should stick with manual labor.


So don't use it then. That's your choice. It's only when you push to take my choices away that we have a problem.


So swipe away and be happy your solution is available rather than push to take options away from others.

It does not sound like you've handled cash or checks before as a transportation employee. Cash management has nothing to do with arithmetic and everything with human inaccuracy. Humans in general mess up on a regular basis and lose things. They also steal things, and cash is easy to pick up and carry off. I'm not saying you can't use cash personally, but what I am saying is that companies like Amtrak have it in their interest to steer customers to plastic only to avoid paying for the manpower to handle cash and its associated problems.

 

[CTANut]

I had an Amish guy give me $3 in cash to get a Coke for him. You can always ask another passenger to use their card and give said passenger cash. There is also a machine in CHI that will give you a prepaid card in exchange for cash. It does not charge a fee.

 

[hlcteacher]

I had an Amish guy give me $3 in cash to get a Coke for him. You can always ask another passenger to use their card and give said passenger cash. There is also a machine in CHI that will give you a prepaid card in exchange for cash. It does not charge a fee.

will this card be accepted by amtrack on trains? all prepaids are not accepted by everyone.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

will this card be accepted by amtrack on trains? all prepaids are not accepted by everyone.

If it’s in CHI - and probably near the ticket counter, I imagine it will be accepted by Amtrak. I saw one around the corner in the room where the ticket counters were at the Moynihan Train Hall.

 

[hlcteacher]

If it’s in CHI - and probably near the ticket counter, I imagine it will be accepted by Amtrak. I saw one around the corner in the room where the ticket counters were at the Moynihan Train Hall.

thank you

 

[Anderson]

I don’t see why they couldn’t run manual credit card slips as needed. These days, you’re just as helpless as you want to be it seems.

The issue is that a bunch of the dingbats (that's the polite term in my book here) at the credit card companies decided that we all wanted these shiny smooth-sided cards that won't imprint. Much as with e-tickets, I do not wish good upon whomever decided this was a good idea since it mostly eliminated this option (and was a PITA on VIA for a while...the Canadian has long stretches without a decent cell signal, so they'd run an imprint slip every day or so in the bar).

It was accepted by an unduly scared nation after 9/11, among a lot of other stupid things that came about as a result. Unfortunately it appears to be a package deal

I had to fly within a week of 9/11. Boy that was something ... way worse than an occasional SSSS, which one can avoid with a little planning. Immediately after 9/11 there was no avoiding.

Mind you not defending any of this. I just work things around over and under the system as best as I can. Having been brought up in an overly bureaucratized society makes one develop attitudes and techniques to work the system instead of getting ulcers about it all the time. Each to his or her own.

All I'm going to say is that there's a reason I hold the TSA as generally being beneath contempt and I'd like to see someone replace "Your safety is our priority" with "Our paycheck is our priority"...

https://www.accountingtoday.com/opi...hing-out-payments-from-the-marijuana-industry
Here's a statement from an accountant -- this is not controversial: "while the IRS is mandated to take tax payments in any form of legal tender, the high volume of cash coming in from taxed cannabis sales has proven difficult for the agency to handle."

And now we get down to a fun point: Is Amtrak a government entity or a private corporation? (This isn't cheeky...being a corporation that is in effect 100% government-owned has made for some interesting case law fights.)

 

[crescent-zephyr]

will this card be accepted by amtrack on trains? all prepaids are not accepted by everyone.

I’ve been on Amtrak trains where prepaid cards and gift cards were not taken by lsa’s. Not sure if that’s a company policy or individual lsa policy.

 

[PVD]

It depends what kind. As an example, Amtrak gift cards are not valid for use onboard. It says that clearly on the site. If the machine is out, that could be a problem on a prepaid or gift card This is what it used to say, but I haven't looked recently :

Gift cards and other prepaid cards with a credit card logo: These are accepted only when the transaction can be electronically validated: at station ticket offices, at Quik-Trak kiosks, at Amtrak.com, by phone at 1-800-USA-RAIL, and on trains for payment of fares and food purchases when the conductor or food services attendant has an operating credit card validation device. Refunds are made back to the gift card, so be sure not to dispose of it once you have used up its value until you are certain that you will not return anything that you have paid with it.

 

[MIrailfan]

Chicago Union Station has reverse ATMS that accept cash for prepaid cards that can be used to buy tickets. Its still cashless there. Concessions and gift shop accept cash.

 

[OBS]

I’ve been on Amtrak trains where prepaid cards and gift cards were not taken by lsa’s. Not sure if that’s a company policy or individual lsa policy.

Company policy

 

[Nick Farr]

And now we get down to a fun point: Is Amtrak a government entity or a private corporation? (This isn't cheeky...being a corporation that is in effect 100% government-owned has made for some interesting case law fights.)

Never forget that Amtrak was a Federal bailout to the railroad industry.

Amtrak is not government owned. It's a regular non-governmental corporation that has a huge and growing accumulated deficit. The common stock that was issued to the legacy railroads still exists, but is effectively worthless. Those shareholders do retain the right to amend Amtrak's articles.

That being said, Amtrak is controlled by the Federal Government. Its Board of Directors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. I don't think they serve at the pleasure of the executive, so as far as case law goes, Amtrak is in a class of entity by itself.

 

[Nick Farr]

The issue is that a bunch of the dingbats (that's the polite term in my book here) at the credit card companies decided that we all wanted these shiny smooth-sided cards that won't imprint.

For Visa/MC this was by design to try to force vendors to pre-authorize and cut down on bad debts.

I believe certain AMEX cards retain this feature.