Credit Card Prank, Round 2

Zug's Credit Card Prank (previously blogged back when I had far fewer readers) cracks lawyers up; apparently regular people find it funny too. Now he's done round two. It's a little scatalogical, but funny: The Credit Card Prank II

This entry was posted in Completely Different. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Credit Card Prank, Round 2

  1. mike says:

    I always write “See photo ID” on the back of my credit cards instead of signing them. Only about 1% of cashiers actually request my photo ID, and in many stores this is a blanket policy, not the result of what I wrote on my card.

    The only time I’ve ever had a problem was at a restaurant in Thailand. After I signed the credit card the receipt the waitress came back tried to communicate something. I thought that she wanted to “see photo ID”, so I showed her my passport. That wasn’t it, but I coudln’t figure out what she wanted. She gave up very quickly, though, and it was only later that I realized that she was concerned because my signature didn’t match the back of the card; she wanted me to sign “See photo ID”.

  2. Cliff Kuiper says:

    …well, I guess some general legalities are appropriate on this topic… in a legal discourse net.

    The banks & credit card companies don’t expect store clerks and cashiers to be handwriting experts… and there’s no need for them to be such experts. So it’s not hard to play games with signatures.

    If a vendor accepts a ‘valid’ credit card for payment, but that transaction later turns out to be fraudulent
    {…due to a forged signature, stolen card, etc.} — the bank and credit-card company ‘eat’ the dollar loss … not the vendor/store/cashier.

    Generally, clerks should ONLY be checking for a signature that roughly matches that on the back of the credit card. If a customer presents a card embossed with the name “John W. Jones” — then they might be held responsible if the customer signs “Mickey Mouse” on the slip, but not much beyond that stuff.

    The real point of requiring a ‘signature’ {…any signature !} on a credit card slip ‘was’ because that was the only point at which a ‘documented’ crime would be committed … if a phony signature was used.
    The crime of “Uttering”.

    With the prevalence of telephone & internet credit-card purchases now (…without ANY signature) — it should be obvious that credit-card transaction ‘signatures’ are unnecessary as a practical matter…. and now merely a quaint custom.

  3. michael says:

    Credit card agreements are not always the same for “card present” and “card not present” transactions. For one thing, credit card issuers typically charge a higher commission for a “card not present” transaction.

    Backcharging stores must be much more common in the UK than here, or there must be some reward system for catching fraudesters, as just about all shop assistants in the UK look very carefully at every signature and compare it to the credit card. And not just for people with American accents.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.