€500 note; legal tender...?

jor el

jor el wrote: »

You got a €500 note from an ATM? I thought ATM's didn't give out anything bigger than a €50 not.

I'd say most places won't accept anything bigger than a €100 note because they wouldn't have the change in the till for it. Buying a few cans and expecting change from a €500 is a bit much.

It depends on where the ATM is. We were going on holiday one year and my uncle took all his spending money out as cash in the airport departures area. It was just a regular TSB machine (I Think) , but when he took out €600 it came out as 3 x €200 notes.

Presumably, because the machines only hold so much, they filled it up with €50s, €100s and €200s.

dermo88

I should point out that we are now living in a society where electronic transactions for large purchases are the preferred means. The reason for having 200 and 500 Euro notes goes back to the inception of the Euro. There were four countries in the Eurozone with high denomination banknotes like this, namely Germany (1,000DM = 510 Euro), Netherlands (1,000 Guilder = 450 Euro), Austria (5,000 Schilling = 365 Euro), Italy (500,000 Lire = 252 Euro). For cultural and historic reasons, people there tended to prefer cash, and were comfortable with that.

Ireland did have high denomination notes, but they were scarce, and tended to be used by Cattle dealers, Auctioneers, Bookmakers, in the rural cash based economy of the 1920's to the 1970's. If we consider that in 1928, the Irish Currency Commission printed 20, 50 and 100 Pound notes with the purchasing power equivalent in todays terms to 2,000, 5,000 and 10,000 Euro, its something of an eye opener. Mind there were "only" 10,000 x 100 Pound notes printed then to cater for a population (then) of 3.5 Million.

It was only after the "great inflation" of the 1970's that high denominations became relatively common again. Even in the 1980's, 50's and 100's were scarce enough. The most forged denomination tends to be worth roughly 4 to 8 hours work on the minimum wage, and that note is.....the 50 Euro. It used to be the 20 Pound note.

If we look over the generations, you see a change towards the highest denomination note being available but scarce. In Ireland, up until the early 1970's, 20, 50 and 100 Pound notes were incredibly scarce, Fivers and Tenners were common enough, since most people were paid in cash.

Worldwide, central bank policy tends to gravitate towards having the second or third highest denomination being the most commonly used/issued from ATM machines. The craziest place I have seen for high value notes being used, oddly enough is Singapore. Their highest note is worth 5,000 Euro (S$10,000), and S$1,000 are common enough - I don't think any of you would want to lose one. They are used in car deals, property deals, casinos (outside Singapore for the moment), and designer clothing stores. However, the S$10,000 note is fitted with an electronic tag, so be prepared for some serious explaining if you try and bring some of them out of the country, and explain where you got the cash from. Not that I have had the fortune to go through such an experience.

On an idealogical point - governments despise high value notes, especially socialist Governments, since they want to rob your hard earned money, and socialists hate the European Central Bank with a vengeance. They believe, with a certain degree of justification that these facilitate tax evasion and criminal activities.

Also, the Euro design, if you notice has been very proactive in thinking 30-40 years ahead in terms of inflation, 500 Euro today, will be worth around 130 Euro at current inflation rates in 30 years time, so I think we'd better get used to these things popping up more often. Incidentally the Spanish nickname for a 500 Euro note is a "Bin Laden". Everyone has heard of them, but hardly anyone has seen one.

parsi

replytohere2004 wrote: »

Watch out for these two note, they may be fake:

I dunno. They look Kosher to me - very similar to the wad of eur355 notes I got from some dodgy looking dude who assured me that they are all the rage in Eastern Europe...

Wertz

Good post dermo88, very interesting. Especially like the bin laden thing...

Faerie

tuxy wrote: »

Sounds right to me. Buying something is a contract and either party can decide they do not want to do the deal.
Some people talk so much crap with no links of consumer law to back it up.

You're right! A shop can of course refuse to accept a 500E note. In contract law it's the customer who initiates the contract - makes the offer- by bringing the goods to the counter. The person at the checkout can decline the offer. There seem to be a lot of 'urban myth' laws in circulation.

I've seen shops in England with signs saying they won't even accept £50 notes! It's funny really because it just shows how £50 is still considered a fair amount of money whereas 50E notes are almost disposable!

Gillo

Wertz wrote: »

like I said above the total came to over 120 euro and in such a shop as Virgin on a saturday afternoon 5 weeks before christmas, I find it very hard to believe that they couldn't manage to cobble together 380 odd in change

TBH, having worked in retail for years I'd say it was a security issue and nothing to be with having available change. As has already been said a lot of store's won't accept 500 notes because of the risk of fake notes, the problem is no matter how hard you stress that it is a general policy a lot of people will take it personally and assume you are accusing them of passing off forged notes; for that reason it's generally safer to blame it on not having enough change.

Also bear in mind, that the store should have been doing a lot of till drops on the day in question so it's possible they may have not had the change there.

tvnutz

Wertz wrote: »

I ended up out on the beer with this guy last night, he was still pissed off about it, reckoned he had spent about 30 minutes wandering around Virgin picking up stuff for presents....like I said above the total came to over 120 euro and in such a shop as Virgin on a saturday afternoon 5 weeks before christmas, I find it very hard to believe that they couldn't manage to cobble together 380 odd in change; I mean every other c*nt out doing their shopping was presumably spending 50's or 20's and the shop was busy.
In the finish up the guy had not enough "acceptable" money (no CC either) to pay for his items so they were left there, his half hour picking them wasted and he has to go and do it all again someplace else.
It's all fine and well going to a bank....unfortunately they don't see fit to open evenings and weekends so TBH going to a bank isn't an option.
Someone else mentioned fake 50's, the only fake euro note I've ever seen. Good enough to fool the eye but doesn't stand up to any closer scrutiny.
No matter what has been said above, I think the refusal is ridiculous, especially when there's no sign to state store policy. You could say he should have asked at the counter prior to starting picking pressies, but in my mind at least I'd find thatmore suspicious than just going up expecting them to take it...

Good one about the bar though, must remember that one...

You hardly think they keep all the money in the tills? I work in an Xtra-Vision and we are not allowed to have more than €200 in the till at any one time. Drops are done regularly. So since he only was going to spend €120 it would have been a lot of change to muster up. It may be their policy not to accept €500 euro notes anyway,but I would not accept one as I wouldn't have that much change. The only time I did accept one was when a guy bought a PS3 for €499 and used a €500 note. Checked it with the pen and it was grand,dropped it in the safe right away.

As for €50 notes,last week we had 3 fake ones taken in,they looked quite real but now we are told we have to check every €50 note with the pen before we take them in.

EamonnKeane

The more cash is in circulation, the more money the EU can make (through guarantees on it, or something). The purpose of the €500 note is to replace the US$100 bill as the main criminal denomination - a wad of 200 x €500 notes is worth as much as 1,500 x $100, it's less bulky and thus easier to conceal.

jor el

dermo88 wrote: »

500 Euro today, will be worth around 130 Euro at current inflation rates in 30 years time

Maybe we can finally get rid of all the coins below 50c then too. They're all practically useless now, they certainly will be then.

Santa Claus

tvnutz wrote: »

You hardly think they keep all the money in the tills? I work in an Xtra-Vision and we are not allowed to have more than €200 in the till at any one time. Drops are done regularly. So since he only was going to spend €120 it would have been a lot of change to muster up. It may be their policy not to accept €500 euro notes anyway,but I would not accept one as I wouldn't have that much change. The only time I did accept one was when a guy bought a PS3 for €499 and used a €500 note. Checked it with the pen and it was grand,dropped it in the safe right away.

We're talking a Virgin megastore in the build up to Christmas. Those tills would be taking a few hundred in notes across the store every 5 minutes so unless they were doing a drop every 10 minutes (which would be stupid as it would take them away from the till for too long) they'd easily have change.

Also these shops have plenty of security as opposed to an xtra-vision so hardly comparing like with like.

The law that allows a shop refuse a purchase is that selling stuff in a shop is called an "invitation to treat" rather i think. I'm sure someone on the legal forum would explain this better than i can.

dermo88

Regarding - Getting rid of coins below 50 cent.

That might be desirable in a High cost location such as Ireland, but that is not the case in other parts of the European Union where costs/salaries are substantially lower. Some of us here remember 1/2p coins until 1984-1985 when they were finally axed. By then they had no practical nuisance, no buying power, and were thoroughly detested. 1 and 2 cent coins will go the same way, and in any case, most countries prefer to have a 100/200 to 1 ratio between lowest value coin and lowest value banknote. So I can see a timescale for the end of the 1 and 2 cent coin in Ireland within the next two-three years (2010). 5 cent coins will last another 15 years before becoming irrelevant (2025), and 10, 20 cent, judging by other countries historical standards should easily last until 2040, so we've quite a long way to go to the point where we get rid of 50 cent coins.

Time and inflation will gradually do this. Its a historical phenomenon in the 20th century. Once we moved away from precious metals as currency in everyday usage in August 1914, some countries have experienced this more than others. The most dramatic example in the old Eurozone being Italy, which fell from 25 Lire to Sterling in 1918 to 2,500 to Sterling by the time the Euro was created. Spain fell from 25 Pesetas in the 1920's to 225 Pesetas to Sterling by the time the Euro was created. Others (yet) again, pulled off revaluations after coming off gold, notoriously Germany (twice), in 1923 when the made 1,000,000,000,000 Papermarks = 1 Reichsmark, and 10 1947 10 Reichsmark to 1 Deutschmark, and if you think Germany was bad, try the commie block bunch who are much worse in the long term. So you see the Germanic paranoia regarding inflation. France also pulled off a revaluation in 1958 when they retarrifed 100 old francs to 1 new.

The United States has seen a 25 fold depreciation in its currency through inflation since moving off gold.

The United Kingdom has seen a 70 fold depreciation in the same way. And if you think thats bad, they are the relatively strong ones in the bunch.

The best performer for managing inflation throughout the entire Eurozone and maintaining its currency WITHOUT change until 2002, are.....The Dutch.

As for the point "the more cash in circulation, the more money the EU makes".

- Thats not quite true. You have to remember what a Banknote essentially is. Its a means of payment. But in the modern era, its easy to forget its old role, it was a cheque, drawn on a private Bank, stating "Payable to bearer on demand". These evolved into becoming fixed denominations, with security features, but in only three countries today, do you actually see the old role of the Banknote - Northern Ireland, Scotland and Hong Kong.

Instead of gold, however, todays these privately issued Banknotes are backed by Bonds, Stocks, Government Securities, and Cash.

The fundamental difference between the Euro and the US Dollar, is that the former is an asset based currency, and the US Dollar is debt based. by debt based, its almost purely US Government debt.

THE ECB makes money through being a lender of last resort for commercial banks. But banknotes and coins constitute a tiny fraction of the total cash in circulation, something less than 5% of the total GDP.

And its more complicated than that. Theres far more to it.

kaiser sauze

Santa Claus wrote: »

Did you offer him the 500 note to do this ?


A lot of major chains don't take anything higher than a 100 euro note as there are a lot of forged notes come into circulation in the run up to christmas when shops are busy and staff are less likely to check the notes.
Obviously they'll accept the risk of getting some forged 50s or 100s but a 500 is just too much to lose.

As for legal tender, a shop is under no onligation to take any notes it doesn't want to under law.

Legal tender, i.e. the €500 note, must be accepted in payments. You're completely wrong here. I expand on this below, but what I state here is based on a perfect world, where change is bountiful.

tuxy wrote: »

Sounds right to me. Buying something is a contract and either party can decide they do not want to do the deal.
Some people talk so much crap with no links of consumer law to back it up.

Ok, back yours up?

Faerie wrote: »

You're right! A shop can of course refuse to accept a 500E note. In contract law it's the customer who initiates the contract - makes the offer- by bringing the goods to the counter. The person at the checkout can decline the offer. There seem to be a lot of 'urban myth' laws in circulation.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Urban myths, indeed.

The business initiates the contract by making the offer, the customer accepts and contract is formed once the business accepts the payment.

The business is free to refuse the payment if it does not wish to honour its offer. This is why, slightly OT, that a business is not bound by the price displayed on an item, but in practice they will let it go at the incorrect price to hopefully feed off the goodwill of the happy customer.

The business cannot renege on the contract by reason of refusing legal tender or having a policy notice saying that they do not accept denominations above 'x' amount. This is illegal.


Back OT.

Businesses can refuse, for example, a €500 for the often mentioned reason that they do not have change, and this is acceptable. You could go down the quagmire of a customer insisting that a business accepts the tender, which they're legally bound to do, but in practice this might simply not be possible for the business. Xtra-Vision, for the reasons given earlier in this thread are a perfect example of this. A customer might not be willing to accept store credit for the change of a €500 note that was used to buy a game for €70. This is where common sense prevails.

Sam Vimes

2 stroke wrote: »

I take offence when a shop that I'm known in, refuses my money. Though I wouldn't expect anyone to accept a high value note for a few euro worth of goods.

the fact that you're known is beside the point. just because you're not a forger doesn't mean you haven't been given a forged note without your knowledge

tuxy

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Urban myths, indeed.

The business initiates the contract by making the offer, the customer accepts and contract is formed once the business accepts the payment.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Remember that an offer is not the same as an invitation to treat. The latter arises where goods are displayed in a shop or on advertising bill board where the consumer is being invited to make an offer on the particular goods.

http://www.performanceplus.ireland.ie/home/index.aspx?id=236

The consumer makes the offer.

See what I mean about having links to back up what you are saying?

kaiser sauze

tuxy wrote: »

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

http://www.performanceplus.ireland.ie/home/index.aspx?id=236

The consumer makes the offer.

See what I mean about having links to back up what you are saying?

LOL

You did not even read your own link. You glossed over the part about invitation to treat, which, in laymans terms, I tried to explain.

tuxy

kaiser sauze wrote: »

LOL

You did not even read your own link. You glossed over the part about invitation to treat, which, in laymans terms, I tried to explain.

Yes I guess you tried, but you explained it incorrectly.

kaiser sauze

tuxy wrote: »

Yes I guess you tried, but you explained it incorrectly.

*shakes head ruefully*

Yes, I tried, but when people don't even read what they tried to use to back themselves up, it's a lost cause.

Faerie

kaiser sauze wrote: »

*shakes head ruefully*

Yes, I tried, but when people don't even read what they tried to use to back themselves up, it's a lost cause.

.

Your previous post makes no sense. Why? Well if the shop was making the offer by displaying goods they would be obliged to sell it regardless of whether or not it was in stock. This would be completely impractical. I sat through many contract law lectures, I know!

Taken from the Court of Appeal judgment in Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Chemists (1952), 'the fact that a customer picks up a bottle of medicine from the shelves in this case does not amount to an acceptance of an offer to sell. It is an offer by the customer to buy, and there is no sale effected until the buyer's offer to buy is accepted by the acceptance of the price.'
Looking at it again I suppose you could argue that the contract is formed when the checkout person accepts the offer but even so it wouldn't be accepted in a court because it's so impractical. So no matter what way you look at it a shop can refuse the note.

tuxy

Thanks Faerie, I knew someone who can talk sense and back it up would post.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Faerie wrote: »

.

Your previous post makes no sense. Why? Well if the shop was making the offer by displaying goods they would be obliged to sell it regardless of whether or not it was in stock. This would be completely impractical. I sat through many contract law lectures, I know!

Taken from the Court of Appeal judgment in Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Chemists (1952), 'the fact that a customer picks up a bottle of medicine from the shelves in this case does not amount to an acceptance of an offer to sell. It is an offer by the customer to buy, and there is no sale effected until the buyer's offer to buy is accepted by the acceptance of the price.'
Looking at it again I suppose you could argue that the contract is formed when the checkout person accepts the offer but even so it wouldn't be accepted in a court because it's so impractical. So no matter what way you look at it a shop can refuse the note.

Just to expand on that, if you want to really piss of a taxi driver, pay with a €500 note, because, at the end of the journey, they debt is incurred, and as legal tender, the taxi driver is obliged to accept it.:D, well in theory...

kaiser sauze

Faerie wrote: »

.

Your previous post makes no sense. Why? Well if the shop was making the offer by displaying goods they would be obliged to sell it regardless of whether or not it was in stock. This would be completely impractical. I sat through many contract law lectures, I know!

Taken from the Court of Appeal judgment in Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Chemists (1952), 'the fact that a customer picks up a bottle of medicine from the shelves in this case does not amount to an acceptance of an offer to sell. It is an offer by the customer to buy, and there is no sale effected until the buyer's offer to buy is accepted by the acceptance of the price.'
Looking at it again I suppose you could argue that the contract is formed when the checkout person accepts the offer but even so it wouldn't be accepted in a court because it's so impractical. So no matter what way you look at it a shop can refuse the note.

The shop are not obliged to sell anything to anyone. The goods on display are an invitation to treat and the seller is not bound by the price or anything at this point. I have said this earlier. The issue is whether the reason for refusing to sell can be given as 'we don't accept notes of a certain denomination' or 'store policy dictates...'; they cannot.

And the point made in the previous post [Sean K] about the taxi fare is a valid one, but I have addressed that in relation to the impracticality of that situation. The taxi driver is obliged to accept the legal tender, but may not be in a position to accept it due to lack of change. He cannot simply go [in a very fast D4 accent] "I don't accept €500 notes" as his reason for refusing. That would be illegal.

Dublin Bus is another grey area crosser, it states on the outside of its buses 'exact change only', or words to that effect. Their reasoning behind this is that passengers accept this as a condition of sale. It could, using a strict interpretation of the law, be challenged, but everyone understands the massive impracticalities that would arise if they were forced to accept everything thrown at them. People use their common sense

In relation to your last point about a shop being able to refuse the note in any instance, you are correct. My point is that the reason given cannot be the refusal of legal tender. That is what we are discussing. They can simply not go forward from invitation to treat stage.

Why did you bring out a case from 1952, taken by the UK company against Boots, in the UK courts system? That would hardly apply here?

It is a slightly grey area, as you said, but the straightforward parts are:

€500 is legal tender for a sale. I think we can all agree on that.

Faerie

kaiser sauze wrote: »

The shop are not obliged to sell anything to anyone. The goods on display are an invitation to treat and the seller is not bound by the price or anything at this point. I have said this earlier. The issue is whether the reason for refusing to sell can be given as 'we don't accept notes of a certain denomination' or 'store policy dictates...'; they cannot.

And the point made in the previous post [Sean K] about the taxi fare is a valid one, but I have addressed that in relation to the impracticality of that situation. The taxi driver is obliged to accept the legal tender, but may not be in a position to accept it due to lack of change. He cannot simply go [in a very fast D4 accent] "I don't accept €500 notes" as his reason for refusing. That would be illegal.

Dublin Bus is another grey area crosser, it states on the outside of its buses 'exact change only', or words to that effect. Their reasoning behind this is that passengers accept this as a condition of sale. It could, using a strict interpretation of the law, be challenged, but everyone understands the massive impracticalities that would arise if they were forced to accept everything thrown at them. People use their common sense

In relation to your last point about a shop being able to refuse the note in any instance, you are correct. My point is that the reason given cannot be the refusal of legal tender. That is what we are discussing. They can simply not go forward from invitation to treat stage.

Why did you bring out a case from 1952, taken by the UK company against Boots, in the UK courts system? That would hardly apply here?

It is a slightly grey area, as you said, but the straightforward parts are:

€500 is legal tender for a sale. I think we can all agree on that.

I was actually just annoyed by your INCORRECT post on contract law. I disliked the way you were dismissing other posters' correct interpretation of contract law. The legal tender thing might be debatable but established definitions of offers aren't. I know what invitations to treat are by the way, I'm not sure why you felt the need to just repeat what I said when your original post is clearly wrong. Oh and the reason I brought up the 1952 case is because it's a leading contract case - in Law most of the leading cases that establish case law are old. Maybe you should try a Law degree.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Dublin Bus is another grey area crosser, it states on the outside of its buses 'exact change only', or words to that effect. Their reasoning behind this is that passengers accept this as a condition of sale. It could, using a strict interpretation of the law, be challenged, but everyone understands the massive impracticalities that would arise if they were forced to accept everything thrown at them. People use their common sense

Not strictly true, Dublin Bus are not obliged to accept legal tender as in the case of a contract involving a bus fare, the customer never incurs any debt, in fact it is Dublin Bus, as such, who incurs the debt, taking payment in advance.

The same is true in a retail situation, such as in Virgin Megastores, as mentioned by another poster. In a retail transaction, the customer is never in any state of debt, and so has no right to invoke legal tender to get out of this non-existant debt.

This is the point people are trying to get across to you. Legal tender need only be receive in repayment of a debt already incurred. ie. a bank is obliged to take your money in repayment of a loan. It may seem obvious but you seem to fail to grasp the fundamental element of the debt.

kaiser sauze wrote: »

€500 is legal tender for a sale. I think we can all agree on that.

I don't think you quite understand the definition of legal tender.

mcaul

alanceltic wrote: »

When the euro was introduced and became legal tender there was a condition that the €200 & €500 could be refused, as far as i know a €100 can not be refused....

A retailer can refuse any note without giving a reason.
The old myth of offering a legal tender note and walking away with goods is exactly that - a myth.

There are a lot of €200 forgeries and they are bloody good - even I got scammed about 2 years ago after checking with ultra violet light & pen - yet still it was a forgery. As for €500 notes - they are not issued by Irish banks except by special request.

kaiser sauze

Faerie wrote: »

I was actually just annoyed by your INCORRECT post on contract law. I disliked the way you were dismissing other posters' correct interpretation of contract law. The legal tender thing might be debatable but established definitions of offers aren't. I know what invitations to treat are by the way, I'm not sure why you felt the need to just repeat what I said when your original post is clearly wrong. Oh and the reason I brought up the 1952 case is because it's a leading contract case - in Law most of the leading cases that establish case law are old. Maybe you should try a Law degree.

Not interested in the degree, sorry. The one I have is fine.

Sean_K wrote: »

Not strictly true, Dublin Bus are not obliged to accept legal tender as in the case of a contract involving a bus fare, the customer never incurs any debt, in fact it is Dublin Bus, as such, who incurs the debt, taking payment in advance.

The same is true in a retail situation, such as in Virgin Megastores, as mentioned by another poster. In a retail transaction, the customer is never in any state of debt, and so has no right to invoke legal tender to get out of this non-existant debt.

This is the point people are trying to get across to you. Legal tender need only be receive in repayment of a debt already incurred. ie. a bank is obliged to take your money in repayment of a loan. It may seem obvious but you seem to fail to grasp the fundamental element of the debt.

I don't think you quite understand the definition of legal tender.

I'm trying to answer the original poster's question; I'm sorry that is beyond you.

mcaul wrote: »

A retailer can refuse any note without giving a reason.
The old myth of offering a legal tender note and walking away with goods is exactly that - a myth.

There are a lot of €200 forgeries and they are bloody good - even I got scammed about 2 years ago after checking with ultra violet light & pen - yet still it was a forgery. As for €500 notes - they are not issued by Irish banks except by special request.

I have addressed your point about retailers' rights to refuse. I have also addressed the situation where it would be illegal. I don't dispute what you say, but my point is that the refusal cannot be worded as I put it earlier in this thread.

The €500 note, and the €200 note, are not printed by The Irish Mint-which in itself is not the correct name for it, but the most commonly used!-at all. Another topic.


I hate to rely on Wikipedia, and the article has an advisory, but without going through the statutes of the finance department, it's the best I can come up with on short notice.

Taken from the link:

The Central Bank of Ireland does not currently introduce €200 and €500 notes into circulation, although these are legal tender in the country. If spent (by people coming from another Eurozone member state) they are unlikely to be passed to other consumers, and will find their way back to the banks (which usually only dispense notes up to €100).

This is the answer to the original poster's question.

---

I am going to merely view this discussion from now on. I've made my points and I stand by them. I worked in a retail environment and came across two such situations, one of which ended up in the courts. Carry on.

Wertz

kaiser sauze wrote: »

This is the answer to the original poster's question.

Thanks for that. I'd already read the wiki on it but apparently it's slightly wrong since I'm fairly certain that the note in question and a few of it's compadres came from an Irish bank just last friday, drawn on from a company cheque.
If what has been stated above is true then Irish banks supposedly gather any 200 or 500 notes that unwittingly get spent in the country by tourists but never release them back into circulation in the country?
Perhaps in this case, the bank was low on cash that day (yeah right) and hadn't enough 50's or 100's to cover the cheque so threw a few 500's in to make up the numbers.
Which brings me back to the pont that if a bank releases them into circulation, then they should be an acceptable form of payment.

As for people arguing with me over safe drops and €200 floats; it's nearly fifteen years since I ran a till. Back then we had this rare beast in circulation called the £100 note, at the time probably comparable in value to the €500 note. They were unusual to see but they did pop up on occasion. We also had a fair share of £50's. Tills back then, at least in places I worked in, usually always had change enough to cover the possibility of someone spending a large note; it'd normally be put to the bottom of the coin drawer or shoved under the 20's until a manager did a drop. Drops certainly didn't happen every 10 minutes. More security and the fear of armed robbery has changed policy in that regard, but it really shouldn't mean that a large retail store is unable to meet a change demand for what, as someone else mentioned, would make up a few minutes of sales on an afternoon like that....

Santa Claus

Such a shame the nominations for the boards awards are closed...Kaiser sauze would have got my vote !

Do euro notes still have the Promissory Note aspect to them that the irish pounds where the signatory of the central bank promised to pay the bear of the note a certain amount ?

Oriel

It's a long story, but I bought a pint in a bar opposite the No.39 bus stop (at least it was then) on Westmooreland St. with a €500 note, and got €495+ change. I had €4 in my pocket but I needed it for the bus!
I explained to the pub owner beforehand, he was grand with it.
True story.

mcaul

Oriel wrote: »

It's a long story, but I bought a pint in a bar opposite the No.39 bus stop (at least it was then) on Westmooreland St. with a €500 note, and got €495+ change. I had €4 in my pocket but I needed it for the bus!
I explained to the pub owner beforehand, he was grand with it.
True story.

There are quite a few retailers who will accept them if someone approaches in this manner. They may ask for ID just to be sure.

The one thing forgers have not been able to do is copy the braille mark on the top of the note. - It a quick and easy way to check if the note is genuine.

Faerie

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Not interested in the degree, sorry. The one I have is fine.



I'm trying to answer the original poster's question; I'm sorry that is beyond you.



I have addressed your point about retailers' rights to refuse. I have also addressed the situation where it would be illegal. I don't dispute what you say, but my point is that the refusal cannot be worded as I put it earlier in this thread.

The €500 note, and the €200 note, are not printed by The Irish Mint-which in itself is not the correct name for it, but the most commonly used!-at all. Another topic.


I hate to rely on Wikipedia, and the article has an advisory, but without going through the statutes of the finance department, it's the best I can come up with on short notice.

Taken from the link:

This is the answer to the original poster's question.

---

I am going to merely view this discussion from now on. I've made my points and I stand by them. I worked in a retail environment and came across two such situations, one of which ended up in the courts. Carry on.

I probably shouldn't keep posting on this because it's getting ridiculous but anyway! I really don't think you answered the op's question. He might think you have but the point is we all know that a 500E note is legal tender, I don't think people were disputing that and I certainly wasn't. The dispute was regarding whether or not a shop has the right to refuse legal tender. As a few posters pointed out certain transactions - for example the taxi driver situation- would theoretically have to accept the note because it's a debt incurred. The issue then is at what exact point in a retail situation does the contract occur. I personally think that it would be when both parties have agreed on the details and I think that the method of paying is included in this so therefore the shop could refuse. I don't remember studying any such case - if as you say a similar case went to court then presumably it has been established in the courts. I'm not a qualified solicitor or barrister so I could well be wrong with my own opinion. I still think that it wouldn't be enforced in a retail situation anyway.