Product: Credit card or prepaid card

The Fair Credit Reporting Act is intended to secure my right to accuracy and fairness, and I have unfairly been taken advantage of by CitiBank on XX/XX/2021. I have also received zero value after administering my credit to CitiBank by way of my credit card, i.e., social security card to extend back to myself in the form of a Double Cash Card. 

On XX/XX/2021, I used my credit card. 

( under 15 USC 1605, a credit card is defined as any card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing to obtain money, property services, or CREDIT for family or household purposes, ) In this transaction, the only card I could have used was my social security card administered to the social security administration. Affiant is aware that I am the original creditor, natural person, and consumer. Because Citibank involved a finance charge, When I used my credit card inside my application, I administered my right to credit for Citi Bank to extend back to me. In the form of a CitiBank Double Cash Card and all the benefits that come along with it. 

( In the definition section, Congress states that under 15 USC 1602, a finance charge is defined as information connected with any consumer credit transaction. ) ( Congress also says. It's determined as the sum of all charges, payable directly or indirectly by the person to whom the credit is extendedand imposed by the creditor as an incident to the extension of credit. ) After completing the application, to my surprise, I was denied by Citi Bank despite me being the original creditor and a natural person. Citi Bank received compensation for this finance charge from what I understand under this section 18 USC 8, and I was left with only an adverse action letter and a hard inquiry placed on my consumer report. 

Based solely on what I've researched in this section, Congress has shown that this appears to be a violation under 15 USC 1681m ( D ) Because I am the consumer, I have the right to prohibit information inside my consumer 's file with any consumer reporting agency from being used in connection with any credit or insurance transaction that the consumer does not initiate. Accordingly, I am here to enforce my rights and depose the following facts. 

I feel that based on what Congress has stated in this section CitiBank violates 15 USC 1681m ( ii ), ( I ), ( II ). An Adverse Action does NOT include experiences between the consumer and the company furnishing the information on a consumer report. 

On XX/XX/2021, I received a notification from CitiBank via email of an Adverse action letter stating I was denied due to information being furnished on my account without my written consent provided in my name by XXXX. 

And they alleged that the natural person has a delinquent credit obligation ( s ), either paid or unpaid. CitiBank says its decision was based in whole or in part because of the furnished information written without my consent from XXXX. 

( I've added exhibits and an affidavit of truth that has been sent to Citibank. ) Citi Bank appears to be in violation based solely on what Congress has said under 15 USC 1691. It shall be unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant concerning any aspect of a credit transaction ( a creditor is defined as a person, and because a person is defined as a natural person meaning born of two human beings, myself, not a lifeless entity such as a corporation, organization, or agency ) ( under this section, an applicant is defined as any person ) ( meaning the right granted to a creditor ). 

Because I am the original creditor and the natural person, CitiBank can NOT deny anything once a finance charge is involved. 

Also, this transaction is derived from the use of my credit card/social security card. And for this application to have been completed, I had to provide that information.