Massachusetts Fast Lane becoming E-ZPass

[US71]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that proprietors are also able to stipulate certain kinds of legal tender as not being accepted so long as the information is given to the consumer before the debt is incurred.

So if you walk into a restaurant and there is a "NO CASH" sign on the hostess's podium then it is valid because you could avoid incurring the debt at that point and say "No, I only have cash, so I'll eat elsewhere." But if they let you sit down and eat and then when they bring the check they tell you they won't accept cash, then it's too late for them to make that stipulation.

Papa John's advertises on all their boxes that drivers carry less than $20 in change. .

[1995hoo]

This is all getting off track from the original question, which was whether it is "legal" (term put in quotation marks for a reason*) for a toll authority to establish a lane where they will accept only exact payment, whether in coins or banknotes or toll tokens or whatever, and will not give change. At least one person thinks it is not "legal." Regardless of your beliefs on what "legal tender" means, I think it's pretty clear that it is not "illegal" to maintain that sort of toll lane, including at a toll plaza you encounter only after you've used the toll facility in question. Why? Because the motorist who owes the toll is free to use any of the other toll lanes at which they don't impose a restriction on payment.

I'm aware of at least one court opinion, although I do not have the citation handy, from a federal court in Texas that ruled that the public water utility could validly refuse to accept cash (even for customers who had already incurred a debt) as a security policy after several of its offices suffered robberies. The customer insisted he was allowed to pay cash under the "legal tender" principle and was charged a late fee, which the federal court upheld. Court opinions like that make me skeptical of comments saying "they can't do that" or the like, although, as I've said before, a particular state or local law might establish a different requirement (I don't know of any and am not inclined to look them up). I suppose it also bears noting that the customer in that case worked at a post office and the court found there was no reason why he couldn't have easily obtained a money order.

*The reason for putting "legal" in quotation marks is that when someone says something is "legal" or "illegal" without specifying under what body of law it tends to be a problem. It's like photo enforcement of traffic laws. I've seen people argue, "It's illegal for them to give you that red light ticket if it doesn't show your face." That argument, is of course, nonsense in states where the camera law explicitly prohibits photographing the driver's face.

[Kacie Jane]

.... Why? Because the motorist who owes the toll is free to use any of the other toll lanes at which they don't impose a restriction on payment.

Unless no such lane exists.

[1995hoo]

.... Why? Because the motorist who owes the toll is free to use any of the other toll lanes at which they don't impose a restriction on payment.

Unless no such lane exists.

The discussion here arose after I mentioned the toll plaza at the Verrazano Bridge and a special lane they used to have (no longer there since the rise of E-ZPass) in which they would accept the exact amount of the toll in cash or via a token, but no change was given. In other words, it was a manned lane, not a machine (since the machines do not accept banknotes). I mentioned using that lane and getting stuck behind a guy who tried to pay the (then-)$7.00 toll with a $50 bill. That particular toll plaza had plenty of other "full-service" lanes and a smaller number of "Toll Machine" lanes (which were obviously almost exclusively used by token-paying customers due to the amount of the toll). Thus, my comment was entirely accurate in the context in which it was made.

If you look back, I mentioned another toll road where the ramp tolls are all limited to E-ZPass or credit/debit card only.

Incidentally, there's a recent (2008) case out of the Western District of New York involving a Rochester city ordinance that required junkyard owners to pay for purchases of junk solely via check (and prohibiting them from then providing a check-cashing service). One of the junkyards sued, claiming the law violated federal law by prohibiting the use of cash. The court found, in part, that there was no violation because the check is payable in United States currency and is thus a legally-recognized substitute for legal tender.

[NE2]

The discussion here arose after I mentioned the toll plaza at the Verrazano Bridge and a special lane they used to have (no longer there since the rise of E-ZPass) in which they would accept the exact amount of the toll in cash or via a token, but no change was given.

Hmmm - I missed the fact that it was an "exact toll" lane. Insult me all you want.

[Kacie Jane]

The discussion here arose after I mentioned the toll plaza at the Verrazano Bridge and a special lane they used to have (no longer there since the rise of E-ZPass) in which they would accept the exact amount of the toll in cash or via a token, but no change was given.

Hmmm - I missed the fact that it was an "exact toll" lane. Insult me all you want.

I did reread the original post (original as it relates to this subthread) and did not miss that -- although I'm somewhat baffled as to the point of having a manned toll lane that doesn't give change.  I'd imagine the time savings are pretty negligible.  (In fact, as a cashier, I could probably make change for a $20 faster than I could uncrinkle and count the seven singles someone pulled out of their cupholder.)

So yes, the person in question there was foolish for choosing the wrong lane -- and it probably wasn't necessary to have this discussion here, particularly as I just noticed this same discussion appeared a month ago in the PA TPK thread.

But my pithy response wasn't directed at just that specific case, since as you said, there are a number of other locations where a driver has incurred a debt and does not have a "legal" lane to go through.  (So in the context my comment was made, it was also correct. )

I will point out, however, that it used to be the case on the Garden State Parkway that if you did get stuck at a ramp toll with no way to pay, it operated on the honor system... you grabbed an envelope provided at the tollbooth, and mailed in your (cash?) payment at your convenience.  Although I recall reading that this practice has ended recently.

[agentsteel53]

The discussion here arose after I mentioned the toll plaza at the Verrazano Bridge and a special lane they used to have (no longer there since the rise of E-ZPass) in which they would accept the exact amount of the toll in cash or via a token, but no change was given.

Hmmm - I missed the fact that it was an "exact toll" lane. Insult me all you want.

you're ugly and Justin Bieber does not want to marry you.

[Kacie Jane]

Jake wins the thread.

ETA:  Although it would have been better if you called him titlegs.

[roadman]

Unless no such lane exists.

Which is why many of the HOT and "all-electronic tolling" roadway setups these days now include a "Bill By Mail" option.  If you don't have a transponder, a camera snaps a picture of your license plate.  You then get a bill in the mail - of course the toll rate for this option is often much higher than for transponder users.

[Brandon]

Unless no such lane exists.

Which is why many of the HOT and "all-electronic tolling" roadway setups these days now include a "Bill By Mail" option.  If you don't have a transponder, a camera snaps a picture of your license plate.  You then get a bill in the mail - of course the toll rate for this option is often much higher than for transponder users.

That said, some of them offer a grace period.  ISTHA (Illinois) allows up to 7 days to pay the full cash toll rate (twice the I-Pass rate) before any fines could potentially be levied.