[ljf]

You might think, but a few years ago, but when credit was crazy cheap in the UK and they were just throwing credit cards at people, I had friends who would go through this process each time they were picking up a bar tab. The credit card company won't let you go over your limit and don't forget just a few years ago there was no easy way to check your limit other than waiting for the bill or calling the company.

I wouldn't be surprised if many people in the service industries still see this type of multi card roulette daily.

I can imagine if the clerk did report his concerns, he'd likely be told they were good customers so why rock the boat....

[aestra]

>I wouldn't be surprised if many people in the service industries still see this type of multi card roulette daily.

Worked as a cashier about 10ish years ago. Never once saw multi card roulette.

Of course once in a while some people would say "20 on this card and 10 in cash." Never seen it with more than one card though. I almost never saw people get declined, I think it happened like 5 times total. It would be highly suspicious to me, especially coming from the same person!

[kalleboo]

> I can imagine if the clerk did report his concerns, he'd likely be told they were good customers so why rock the boat....

Isn't the merchant liable for the chargebacks? Or in this case, who was footing the bill for this fraud?

[Nursie]

The bank, most likely, or their insurance provider. Deoending on US law (which protects people less than the UK AFAICT) the customer may have some liability. But basically the bank OK'd the transactions so it's on them.

Of course if it's that frickin' obvious what's going on then the merchant will find themselves under review and saddled with much higher fees after a while.

[edent]

The merchant may be liable - but the minimum wage clerk...?

[aestra]

Minimum wage clerk is not liable due to many laws that protect employees from wage abuse without a judgement in court[1] but they can surely get fired for negligence in reporting suspicious activity.

[1] http://www.seyfarth.com/dir_docs/publications/NEHT01120810.p...

>As a practical matter, the Court’s decision means that employers can- not safely take deductions for theft or damage to property unless fault and value have been determined by a court of law or government agency.