She Sent the Same Fax Over 150 Times to Force a Credit Card Company to Do Their Job

We are living in the year 2025, but banking institutions are seemingly still stuck in 1985.

Dealing with financial institutions can feel like screaming into a void, especially when simple administrative tasks get trapped in a bureaucratic nightmare. One customer, fed up with a credit card company losing her paperwork multiple times, decided to use the company’s preferred, and archaic, communication method against them.

What ensued was a “fax-bombing” campaign so aggressive that the company had no choice but to pay attention.

Now, read the full story:

There is something deliciously ironic about technology from the 80s saving the day in the 2020s.

You have to appreciate the persistence here. The fact that the credit card company could “lose” three separate submissions but instantly find the documentation once it became a nuisance proves that incompetence is often a choice.

It’s classic corporate “weaponized inefficiency.” They make the hurdle so high (or in this case, the fax machine so obscure) that you eventually just give up. By overwhelming their system, the OP flipped the script: it became more painful for them to ignore the problem than to fix it.

Also, it highlights the ridiculous fragility of our financial systems. You can update your driver’s license (a government ID!) with ease, but a credit card company needs you to send an ancient scroll via fax? The frustration is tangible because it’s so relatable.

4. Expert Opinion

This story is a perfect case study in “Sludge.”

This is the term behavioral economist Cass Sunstein uses to describe the friction companies (and governments) introduce to make processes harder than they need to be. In his book Sludge, Sunstein argues that organizations use paperwork, wait times, and administrative burdens to discourage people from getting what they are entitled to.

When the bank claimed they “didn’t receive” the documents, they were essentially engaging in administrative gatekeeping. By demanding a fax, a technology largely obsolete outside of healthcare and legal sectors, they add a layer of friction. Most millennials and Gen Z do not have a fax machine; they have to use apps (as the OP did), which cost money or time to set up.

According to a report by The Washington Post regarding customer service trends, “escalation via inconvenience” is becoming a standard consumer tactic. When digital tickets are ignored, consumers resort to public shaming or, in this rare case, overwhelming the intake system.

However, be warned: what the OP did walks a fine line. Flooding a communication channel could technically be flagged as harassment or abuse of service terms. But because fax technology is dumb (it has no spam filter like email), it is uniquely vulnerable to this kind of “Malicious Compliance.”

The lesson here? If an organization forces you to use an archaic communication channel, they can’t be surprised when you use it thoroughly.

Check out how the community responded:

The most delightful part of the comment section was realizing that the OP isn’t the only person using 20th-century tech for revenge. 

Readers shared their own tales of facing walls of incompetence, from banks to insurance companies, validating that this is a systemic issue.

Some users wondered if the incompetence was even lawful, considering banking regulations are supposed to prevent fraud but not prevent customers from accessing their own accounts.

Real Talk: Stop Playing Their Game

Look, spamming a fax machine is funny, but it’s risky and time-consuming. Next time a bank gives you the run-around, skip the “malicious” part and go straight to the “legal threat” part.

1. The “Certified Mail” Power Move:
Forget standard mail. Forget faxing. Send your documents via Certified Mail with a Return Receipt. It costs about $4 at the post office. This creates a legal paper trail. They physically cannot claim they “didn’t receive it” because someone in their mailroom had to sign for it. Once you have that receipt, you say: “I have the signature from [Date] at [Time]. Fix this now.”

2. The “Breach of Contract” Card:
If you have provided the necessary legal documents and they refuse to update your account, they are failing to maintain accurate records, which banks are required to do by federal law (like the PATRIOT Act in the US, which demands accurate Customer Identification Programs). Mentioning that you will file a complaint with the CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) usually gets a manager on the phone faster than 100 faxes.

3. Cancel and Walk:
If a credit card company can’t update a name in two months, imagine how they will handle a fraud claim? Poor administration is a symptom of poor security. As one commenter did: vote with your feet.

Conclusion

Bureaucracy relies on your exhaustion. They assume you will just hang up and try again next week. The OP proved that when you refuse to be exhausted, and instead become the source of their exhaustion, miracles happen.

A new card appeared in three days. Coincidence? Absolutely not.

So, was the OP a hero for jamming the lines, or a villain for harassing the office staff?