Cashless petrol station: "sanctionable", according to a forum user

Why a petrol station cannot refuse to accept cash

Some argue that refusing cash payment is illegal, and that not having complaint forms is even more so. There is a gap between that theory and the counter of a service station. A driver recounts that he entered a petrol station, saw that the pump offered no cash payment option, asked for an explanation at the kiosk and received a reply that ended the conversation: they don't accept cash and don't have complaint forms. He asks for help to report it. And when trying, he runs into a problem that ends up being the real crux of the case: he thinks about calling the Local Police to file a report, but remembers that his car has not passed the roadworthiness test (ITV) since 2018 and antiestéticars the officer will notice the expired sticker on the windscreen. He has been driving like this for four years, with cash in his pocket and his paperwork not in order.

Is it legal for a petrol station to refuse cash payment?

The short answer, as maintained in the case itself, is that refusing cash is sanctionable. Some recall that the obligation to accept cash is enshrined in law and that a service station fulfils an essential function: if you run out of fuel and only have cash, the problem multiplies. Against this is the argument that the establishment is free to set its conditions as long as it announces them in advance. Therein lies the flaw: announcing at the door that only cards are accepted may be debatable; announcing it late, with the tank already half full, turns the payment into a dead end. Anyone who doesn't want to accept cash only has to watch the customer leave. Except the customer has already filled up... or hasn't been able to.

The complaint form that "doesn't exist"

Denying the document is the second front. In the case it is argued that not handing over the complaint form to whoever requests it is a very serious infraction, with the risk of closing the business. Others add a nuance: there is contested and annulled criteria on the scope of that obligation, a point attributed to a police officer's judgement. Without the document, the consumer loses the formal channel to record the complaint. With the document, the complaint reaches the competent body and the business responds. The difference between one thing and the other is whether the customer ends up writing the complaint at a town hall and not at the beach bar that denied it. And for that you have to call the officers.

The officer who no longer needs the sticker

Here emerges the fact that, according to one participant, dismantles the driver's caution. There are mobile devices with applications that read number plates and issue immediate alerts: failed roadworthiness test, uninsured vehicles, embargoes. An officer stationed on a street can issue paperwork for a whole day's work in 20 metres. The antiestéticar that the police will discover the expired roadworthiness test does not depend on someone looking at the windscreen: the system detects it automatically. The driver has not dodged the problem, he has postponed it.

Car without roadworthiness test: the surcharge that does arrive

The issue branches off into a very specific side: what happens with the insurance of a car that fails the inspection. The thesis defended by one participant is that without a valid roadworthiness test the insurer can refuse to cover certain damages and that whoever causes an accident with an expired inspection is exposed to million-euro claims. In the case, the bill is religiously paid every January without the company asking for any proof that the inspection is up to date; a windscreen was replaced without questions. The criticism is obvious: to collect there are no requirements, to pay the excuse appears. To this is added the matter of lights: old headlights that give little light, a non-approved xenon kit and a roadworthiness test that is not passed until it is regularised. The most repeated solution is to fit approved parts for the inspection and then refit the originals.

A country pushing towards digital payment

The background layer is the decline of cash. It is noted that more and more businesses make cash payment difficult, from the supermarket to the large retail park, with the argument of the costs and losses generated by handling cash. And an uncomfortable suspicion is added: that the Tax Agency is interested in money moving through traceable channels. If the trend consolidates, the petrol station that today refuses coins will find company tomorrow. The corollary is that the citizen with cash is pushed into a system he does not control.

A costly battle to win

The complaint, according to the protagonist, has already been filed. He has also decided not to set foot in a roadworthiness test station again nor beg for approvals across half a dozen offices. The bet is risky: the fine will come from one side, the repair from another and with it the insurance bill if there is ever an accident. It is likely that the regulations will eventually catch up with those who do not want to accept cash. It is also likely that the petrol station without complaint forms will not lift a finger while no one checks anything.