Product: Credit card or prepaid card

Discover has done a horribly flawed and indescribably frustrating job of handling a very simple dispute. 

In XX/XX/2017, a charge was billed to my Discover card by XXXX XXXX for an appraisal on a property that I was buying. When I received the report, there were several problems with the document. It was full of incorrect information. It was clear that the appraiser had simply used another appraisal from another property and changed a few things like the property address, etc ... and took a few photos. This was grossly unacceptable. There was basic factual information that any professional ( or lay person ) could easily verify, but they did not even bother. They threw it together and charged {$500.00}. The county listed on the appraisal is incorrect. The HOA costs are incorrect. The property taxes are incorrect, and a host of other issues about the property itself are incorrect. 

After both the seller of the property and I separately contacted the appraiser and asked him to make corrections ( which he never did ), I disputed the charge with Discover. The dispute was resolved in my favor and closed. Unbeknownst to me, XXXX XXXX later abused the credit card information in their possession to charge my Discover card again in XX/XX/2017. I only discovered the charge while looking at statements later for a different reason. 

I contacted Discover. They immediately informed me that this was fraud if I had not requested another service from that merchant and was billed again. They stated that the merchant could continue charging the card and committing fraud unless they deactivated the card. So, they immediately deactivated the card, created a completely new account, and sent a new card with a new number. 

XXXX XXXX later submitted to Discover a copy of the credit card authorization between myself and the lender ... ... To be clear, the authorization does NOT anywhere mention authorizing " XXXX XXXX '' to charge the Discover card. " XXXX XXXX '' appears nowhere on the authorization. XXXX XXXX also submitted a note containing a number of false statements and irrelevant information about their process and how mortgages and loans work, etc. This was a distraction from the fact that they have abused credit card information in their possession. 

Discover then informed me that they do not consider this to be fraud, because they do not believe the merchant did anything to steal or illegally obtain the credit card information. It was then referred back to the billing dispute department. Recently, I learned that Discover refuses to credit the second {$500.00} charge back to my account, the charge of which I knew nothing and gave XXXX XXXX no permission to bill. 

I contacted the police, and they absolutely consider this credit card fraud. I was billed for the same service twice ( by a company that was not named on the authorization ). The dispute was closed after being resolved in my favor. That was the end. XXXX XXXX had no basis in law or in equity to bill the Discover card again. In fact, what they did is very much fraud and is very much against the law. They utilized credit card information in their possession to bill a credit card again for the same service that had already been disputed and resolved in my favor. Criminal charges have been filed against the merchant. 

Discover informed me that the reason for Discover 's decision was that the service is " nonrefundable according to the merchant ''. So, Discover decided that I should pay {$500.00} for a sloppy and careless service that they had already previously resolved in my favor and closed. To be clear, the authorization, as I mentioned before, does NOT mention " XXXX XXXX '', NOR does the authorization, anywhere ... .in any of the fine print, state that the service is nonrefundable. 

What is the value of expending time and resources on a dispute process if Discover allows a merchant to simply bill the customer again after the dispute has already been resolved in the customer 's favor and closed? And separately, if the authorization does not state that the service is nonrefundable, why not just let all merchants later decide to state that whatever goods and services they provide are nonrefundable? Discover can then save a lot of money by eliminating the entire dispute department. They will obviously lose customers, but that does not seem to bother them anyway ...

I consent to CFPB publishing this complaint publicly.