Product: Credit card or prepaid card

I, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( " the customer '' ) allege that in all times mentioned in this complaint, the American Express Company XXXX XXXX ( " the Company '' ) intentionally violated his constitutionally protected activities by engaging in a series of coordinated and deliberate actions, outlined herein, with intent to cause severe emotional distress, embarrassment, financial harm, and unlawful disregard to his rights under the ADA and Federal Oversight protections which seek to advance the legal rights and protections of consumers. 

American Express, with knowledge of my XXXX orientation, terminated access to services otherwise enjoyed by other members. The company expends considerable resources to advance covert practices designed to promote the advancement of preferment. While the extent and frequency of these decisions of preferment are used to target others, the suppression of an inherent right to enjoy the freedoms afforded by the United States Constitution is dismissed. This unlawful activity is accepted and shamefully obvious. 

Upon information and belief, the company ended my membership after an agent of the company engaged in hateful and derogatory speech, directed at insulting my XXXX orientation. 

I am a person who has a XXXX, or a person perceived to have a XXXX. I directed frustration in the form of words to the person who made the biased comment. The agents are noted as ( Unknown Female # 1 - " UNKNOWN F1 '' and Unknown Female # 2- " UNKNOWN F2. '' Unknown F1 and F2 knowing violated my constitutional rights as a XXXX male by referring to me as a " XXXX '' and " XXXX, '' As a result, the company canceled my membership on XX/XX/2022, with the knowledge that the XXXX incident was a hate crime. Their decision was not only retaliatory but unconstitutional. Albeit, the cardholder terms state that they may cancel a membership at any time. This policy is most likely illegal, if not to the detriment of consumers when situations occur ( such as the one I went through which was remarkably reflective of a hate crime ). 

The company has admitted that " members '' or " consumers '' are not entitled to access policies or protections which would otherwise address, inter alia, services for persons with XXXX, and protections from an unfair bias of an individuals XXXX orientation. It is established doctrine that anyone who enjoys protection under the laws of our constitution has not only the right to question but to reasonably request services without fear of shame, retaliation, or injustices which, if left unaddressed, adapts and fosters a culture unable to self-sustain a balance where the prevalence of justice is the central focus. 

Ongoing Harassment : On XX/XX/2022, from XXXX EST to XXXX EST, the company with intent, violated 28 CFR, Chapter 1 : Department of Justice, Part 36 - Nondiscrimination on the Basis of XXXX by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities. Subpart B - General Requirements, 36.201 Prohibition of Discrimination and 36.206 Retaliation or coercion as noted below.

The company, through an agent ( Unknown Male # 1 - " UNKNOWN M1 '' ) who identified himself as " XXXX '' from the corporate executive office refused to accept a request for a reasonable accommodation based on XXXX. The agent admitted at the time he was aware of a XXXX but verbally retaliated and threatened to delay my request until such time as the company researched an internal issue. UNKNOWN M1 did admit that the company canceled my cardmember relationship on XX/XX/2022, after a female agent of AMEX Travel Services referred to me as a " XXXX. '' The consumer responded proportionally to the hate speech and disconnected the call. 

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) issued an interpretive rule clarifying that the prohibition against XXXX discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) and Regulation B includes XXXX orientation discrimination and gender identity discrimination. This prohibition also covers discrimination based on actual or perceived nonconformity with traditional sex- or gender-based stereotypes, and discrimination based on an applicants social or other associations. 

At the times and places relevant to this incident, American Express violated my rights and knowingly prevented me from engaging in protected activities under the ADA. 

This matter originated from an interaction with American Express Travel on or about XX/XX/2022 ( with Unknown F1 ) who, employed by the company did refer to me as a " XXXX. '' To date, the company has engaged in substantial harm to the well-being of my emotional and physical well-being through their actions and continues to do so.