Product: Credit card

*Fraudulent charge 1 : {$840.00} ( from XXXX XXXX # XXXX XXXX PA purchased on XX/XX/2024, XXXX XXXX  ET in store at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX PA XXXX ) *Fraudulent charge 2 : {$860.00} ( from XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXXXXXX XXXX PA purchased on XX/XX/2024 XXXX XXXX XXXX, no purchase location recorded in credit card transaction records ) *Fraudulent charge 3 : {$800.00} ( from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX PA purchased on XX/XX/2024, no additional timestamp or purchase location recorded in credit card transaction records ) I am a victim of identity theft. These fraudulent charges totaling {$2500.00} were incurred on my credit card over three days, but I have not bought anything from XXXX  or XXXX XXXX XXXX in person or online. I dont have a membership to XXXX  XXXX XXXX and could not enter the store or shop online there even if I wanted to. I also have proof that I was in XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and not XXXXwhere at least one and potentially all three of the charges were incurredat the time of these charges. I have physical grocery store and bar receipts plus eyewitnesses confirming my presence in New York on these days. 

On XX/XX/2024 I checked my Citi credit card balance and noticed the three fraudulent charges. I immediately froze the credit card and disputed the three charges through my online citi.com account. ( I dont know why Citi didnt flag any of these charges as unusual since I dont have any purchase history at these stores and do not spend $ XXXX a day for several days on end. ) On XX/XX/2024, at XXXX XXXX  ( confirmed by my phone logs ) I received a text message claiming to be from Citi : We need to speak to you about your fraud dispute. Please contact us as soon as possible at XXXX. I XXXX  this phone number and could not confirm it was from Citi. Since I had three fraudulent charges charged to me already, I suspected I was a victim of identity theft and was cautious about replying to unconfirmed numbers that would ask me to divulge personal information. Instead, minutes later, I called Citis customer service number listed on their website to confirm whether the bank had contacted me, which resulted in the following... 

On XX/XX/2024, at XXXX XXXX  ( my phone logs ) I called the general Contact Us phone number on the Citi website at ( XXXX ) XXXX to confirm if the bank had tried to text me about the fraudulent charges. The representative said the bank was investigating the three charges, but they had NOT texted me and even cautioned me to stay safe. I received later texts, voicemails, and emails that were purportedly from Citi, but I could not confirm if they were legitimately from the bank. The emails were from XXXX, which is not the email address I receive regular Citi communications from for credit card offers ; the copyright symbol in these emails was not in a consistent place ; and phone numbers provided could not be verified as from Citi. They appeared to be scam communications. I did monitor the three disputed charges by checking the Citi online Fraud Dispute Center every few days. 

On or around XX/XX/2024 I checked the status of the disputed charges on the online Fraud Dispute Center and found that Citi closed the investigations and was holding me responsible for the charges : If you still need more information on the decision, you can contact us at XXXX ( TTY XXXX ). I called the listed number at XXXX XXXX  and was told that since I did not respond to requests for information the investigation was closed. I asked to reopen the investigations and responded to the Citi representatives questions. In the days that followed, I did not receive any emails, texts, or calls about the investigations being reopened, nor did the Fraud Dispute Center update to reflect that. 

On XX/XX/2024 I called Citi at the XXXX number twice to confirm whether or not the investigations into the disputed charges had indeed reopened, since I hadnt received any written communication that they had. 

The first representative said something to the effect that the investigation was reopened, but since I was still in possession of the physical credit card with the chip, that fraud was unlikely. I asked to reopen the investigation and the rep assured me that Id receive an email. I also asked to speak to the investigator and was ultimately denied the opportunity. 
I called again on the same day because I did not receive an email stating the case had been reopened, and the status of the investigation on the online Fraud Dispute Center still reported the investigation as closed. I asked a different representative if the disputes had been reopened and he said they had. Relieved, I asked him to send to me in writing 1 ) confirmation that the investigations were reopened, and 2 ) the investigation report detailing why they had denied the claims. I explained that fraudulent charges can obviously still be incurred without the physical chip card, since its not as if XXXX drivers or any number of other merchants need to physically handle a credit card to charge it if card information is stored in a digital account. Additionally, digital security breaches of online stores where the card was used could have made the credit card number available for fraudulent charges ( a.k.a. XXXX XXXX  ). I reiterated the fact that I had not bought anything from XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX, could verify my presence in XXXX XXXX XXXX and had not been to Pennsylvania. I confirmed my email address as well as my mailing address several times over the call, and the representative told me that he would send an email addressing my two requests that same day. 

It's preposterous that Citi evidently takes the stance that credit card fraud is now impossible with EMV chips. It's preposterous that Citi fails to consider the possibility of data breaches, skimming devices, card details stolen during an online transaction on a compromised website, or XXXX fraud in its investigations of disputed charges. 

As of today, XX/XX/XXXX, I havent received any written confirmation from Citi that it is investigating the three disputed charges, and the online Fraud Dispute Center still reports the investigation as closed. My credit card account states that minimum payments on the three charges that I never incurred or authorized are due starting in XXXX. Im filing this complaint with the goal of having these fraudulent charges totaling {$2500.00} removed from my credit card account within 60 days of first reporting them, and within the two billing cycles which is customary for Citi to resolve investigations, by its own report. 

Im attaching the credit card transaction records of the three disputed charges which show that at least one and possibly all three of the charges were incurred in Pennsylvania. These are all the records of the fraudulent charges visible to me through my credit card account. 

Im also attaching credit card transaction records that verify my in-person physical presence in XXXX, NY on the days of the fraudulent charges ( and so impossible to simultaneously be making purchases in Pennsylvania ) . I have the physical receipts for these NY purchases and can scan and submit copies if necessary, as well as ticket stubs for local events I attended and statements from witnesses that I can collect to further confirm my location. 

Im mailing the text of this complaint via certified mail to Citibank to reiterate my request for 1 ) confirmation that the investigations were reopened, and 2 ) the investigation report detailing why they had denied the claims. Im sending this request to : Citibank Customer Service XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, SD XXXX