Proteger identidad en tiendas, zip code, voluntario

Corte Declara en caso de solicitud de  Zip Code - en tiendas

clarifying and nonsubstantive suggests the Legislature understood former section

1747.8 to already prohibit the requesting and recording of any of the information,

including ZIP codes, contained on driver‟s licenses and state identification cards.

Second, the 1990 version of former section 1747.8 forbade businesses from

“requir[ing] the cardholder, as a condition to accepting the credit card, to provide

personal identification information . . . .” (Stats. 1990, ch. 999, § 1, p.4192.) In

1991, the provision was broadened, forbidding businesses from “requesting or

requir[ing] as a condition to accepting the credit card . . . , the cardholder to

provide personal identification information . . . .” (Stats. 1991, ch.1089, § 2,p.

5043, italics added.) “The obvious purpose of the 1991 amendment was to

prevent retailers from „requesting‟ personal identification information and then

matching it with the consumer‟s credit card number.”“The 1991 amendment prevents a retailer from making an end run around the law by claiming the customer furnished personal identification data „voluntarily.‟ ” (Ibid.) That the Legislature so expanded the scope of former section 1747.8 is further evidence it intended a broad consumer protection statute.

To be sure, the legislative history does not specifically address the scope of

section 1747.08, subdivision (b) or whether the Legislature intended a ZIP code,

without more, to constitute personal identification information. However, the

legislative history of the Credit Card Act in general, and section 1747.08 in

particular, demonstrates the Legislature intended to provide robust consumer

protections by prohibiting retailers from soliciting and recording information

about the cardholder that is unnecessary to the credit card transaction. Plaintiff‟s

interpretation of section 1747.08 is the one that is most consistent with that

legislative purpose