Here's an idea that ought to catch on.
In 2008 a man named Dmitry Alexeev (not his real surname) received a credit card solicitation in the mail, just like the ones probably clogging your mailbox right now. Enclosed in the solicitation was an agreement contract / application which he signed and returned. Shortly thereafter he received a credit card, along with a copy of the agreement, certified by the bank and signed by one of its officers.
But Dmitry had changed the small print of the agreement before signing it.
He opted in for a 0% APR and no fees, and added that the customer "is not obliged to pay any fees and charges imposed by bank tariffs." He also changed the URL of the site where the terms and conditions were published from www.tcsbank.ru to tcsbank.at.ua. Additionally, he added a special clause that would protect him should the bank break the agreement in a unilateral manner. For each unilateral change in the terms provided in the agreement, the bank would be asked to pay the customer (Alexeev) 3 million rubles (about $91,000), or a cancellation fee of 6 million rubles ($182,000).
After a couple of years the bank cancelled his account with a remaining balance of $575 plus an additional $788 in fees. The bank sued, and lost when the court decided that the agreement signed by both parties was valid. Dmitry was only responsible for the outstanding balance.
But Dmitry took his victory as an indication that the entire contract was valid, maintaining that the bank had broken 8 of the contract's clauses, for a total penalty of 24 million rubles ($727,000).
The next court date is in September.