« Do young people want microchip payment implants? Not really. | Main | Chip implants may work for animals, but not children »
October 13, 2006
Cashless cafe puts an end to anonymous meals?
National Public Radio is reporting on a cafe in Washington D.C. called "Snap" that won't accept cash. [Click NPR's "Listen" link to hear the audio.]
Though the story claims that refusing cash is legal in DC., it got me thinking about cash. The text on banknotes informs us that they are "legal tender for all debts public and private." But if this is really the case, shouldn't we have a legal right to use cash to settle a debt, regardless of a particular merchant's policy?
I had an experience a few years back where I incurred a debt for car repairs, but the dealer refused to take my cash as payment. When I arrived with several hundred dollars in hand to pick up my car, I was told that they would only take a check or a credit card. Only after a lengthy discussion, the threat of a lawsuit, and several phone calls, did they finally relent and give me back my car. One of my arguments centered around the "legal tender" language on the bills. "Do I owe you money?" "Yes." "Would you consider that a debt?" "Yes." "Then you are obligated to take this cash to settle the debt." It worked.
Whether the "debt" issue kicks in at the D.C. cafe is another question. Since it could be argued that a customer does not incur a debt until he or she consumes the restaurant's wares, a lot depends on how the restaurant is set up..If the cafe is the kind where customers put food on a tray and pay at a cashier station before eating it, the policy seems legally defensible.
If, on the other hand, customers order from the menu and consume the food or drink before the bill arrives, they have incurred a legitimate debt and should be able to use cash as "legal tender" to satisfy it.
It would be interesting to get the views of a lawyer on this issue. Does "legal tender for all debts public and private" really mean what it says? Several people have written to me over the years saying that they would consider filing lawsuits to retain their right to use cash to settle debts. If the cashless restaurant idea catches on, it may soon be coming to that. And people like me will be getting mighty hungry.
- Katherine Albrecht
Posted by Katherine Albrecht at October 13, 2006 9:14 AM
Comments
Katherine, you are right it seems to be quite a common statute around the world. The fight to maintain non electronic legal tender will be a quite one for a while yet as the majority of the population consider convenience over the gradual and hard to perceive loss of liberty.
Wikipedia defines the situation as this:
In some jurisdictions legal tender can be refused as payment if no debt exists prior to the time of payment (for example, where the obligation to pay arises substantially contemporaneously with the offer of payment). Consequently vending machines and transport staff do not have to accept the largest denomination of banknote for a single bus fare or bar of chocolate, and even shopkeepers can reject large banknotes — this is covered by the legal concept known as invitation to treat. However, restaurants that do not collect money until after a meal is served would have to accept that legal tender for payment of the debt incurred in purchasing the meal.
Posted by: Paul at October 13, 2006 10:10 AM