The Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act was intended to fight fraud and identity theft by giving consumers certain rights if a merchant commits certain credit card receipt violations.
One of the ways FACTA can reduce the risk of fraud is to limit the information that can be shown on electronically-printed credit card receipts to the last five digits of the credit or debit card number.
FACTA laws also prohibit the printing of the card’s expiration date on the credit or debit card receipt.
What is FACTA?
The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act is a federal law enacted in 2004 that stipulates only the last five digits of a credit card number may be printed on a receipt and the receipt must not include the expiration date.
As a result of FACTA, merchants cannot print card numbers outright on a receipt. Instead, a process of truncation is used. In line with this, card numbers are masked with symbols such as #’s or *’s to ensure that the card holders details are kept hidden. Failure to do so can result in that merchant being charged with FACTA credit card receipt violations.
For credit card receipts violations – or debit card receipt violations – courts are instructed to impose $100 to $1,000 in damages, in addition to possible punitive damages.
Violations of FACTA
FACTA states: “no person that accepts credit cards or debit cards for the transaction of business shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number or the expiration date upon any receipt provided to the cardholder at the point of the sale or transaction.”
In line with the above, FACTA credit card receipt violations can occur as a result of merchants, such as restaurants, retailers or other business doing one or more of the following:
- All or part of the expiration date of a credit or debit card is printed on a receipt (e.g. if a card expiration number was September 2021, it would be a violation if any number that suggests that date, such as EXP. 09/21, or EXP. 09/2021 or EXP. **/21).
- Five or of the last 5 digits of a card number, or printing any of the other digits (even if it is less than five). For example, if a card number was 2222-4444-6666 a merchant would be violating FACTA if they printed any of the following: 222*-****-**66, or 2***-4***-6666, or even ****-44**-****.
Filing a Lawsuit for Credit Card Receipt Violations
Any merchant that continues to print non-FACTA compliant receipts and thereby commits credit card receipt violations could be subject to enormous statutory damages for willful violations of FACTA.
The Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act allows prevailing plaintiffs to be awarded actual damages or, in the case of defendants who willfully fail to comply with the law, statutory penalties between $100 and $1,000 per affected consumer.
If you have received a receipt and you think that it had any of the above details printed on it, then your rights have been violated and as a consumer it is well within your rights to file a FACTA credit card receipt violations lawsuit to obtain a recovery. If successful with the lawsuit, you could obtain compensation, even if no identity theft occurred as a result of the information on the receipt.
Free FACTA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
If you made one or more purchases and the retailer provided you with a receipt that contained more than the last five digits of your credit or debit card number or the expiration date, you may be eligible for a free class action lawsuit investigation and to pursue compensation for these FACTA violations.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2025 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
One thought on FACTA Protects Consumers from Credit Card Receipt Violations
Facta does nothing when judges are tossing cases left and right because they believe they are above the law.
No such thing as statuatory damages as these judges are looking for actual loss.