<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Super Douchiev" data-cid="207622" data-time="1376076188">
<div>
Some of the comments were saying, he could have committed fraud by altering the contract which (in the US at least is illegal) but, thats a shady line in my opinion. i.e. what if you wrote your own contract that matched theirs word for word save for the tidbits you changed, technically then, you didnt alter their contract you wrote your own. </p>
</p>
One judge already ruled in his favor, I hope the next one does too. I am totally with you in that the bank should have read what was being signed.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Altering the contract would be (in my non expert opinion) altering a signed contract with agreed upon conditions by both parties. This was not an altered contract, It was recreated. The interesting stipulation here for me was what the contract looked like. If it was a standard contract and bared no markings by the credit card company then he's good to go, but if it was on their letterhead or used their information inproperly, then indeed you are looking at a different case scenario. He would be misrepresenting the credit card company as the creator of the contract that was created. Meaning, he has no authority to underwrite a contract on behalf of the credit card company, and by misrepresenting that company, even to the company itself then it's fraud. Look at it another way, if he did the same thing, but instead of sending it back to the company he sent it out to thousands of people. And even one of them sent it back to him signed, would you hold that person liable?</p>
