Product: Credit card

On XX/XX/XXXX of this year, I attempted to rent for XXXX days a condominium in XXXX XXXX, NM for myself, my spouse, and another couple. We had tickets to the XXXX XXXX XXXX for the XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX of XXXX. On the Internet, I found a condominium with XXXX bedrooms and XXXX baths -- exactly what we needed. The advertised cost was {$270.00} per night. Since we were staying for XXXX nights, I expected a total cost of about {$840.00}. An online outfit calling itself XXXX did warn me that my commitment, if made, was nonrefundable. I was willing to pay what I thought would be about {$840.00}, so I clicked to reserve the condo. Almost immediately, I received confirmation from XXXX, but to my surprise the charge came to {$2400.00}, not {$840.00} as I expected. This is almost 3 times greater than what XXXX claimed the charge would be for a XXXX night stay on its website, and certainly much greater than anything I was willing to commit to. My first response was to immediately click the " dispute '' button contesting the {$2400.00} charge on my Visa credit card account with Citi Bank.

It is important to note that I was given no chance to review the proposed rental contract to see if the terms were acceptable to me. They just charged me {$2400.00} on my Costco-Citi Bank Visa credit card without seeking my approval or consent. As it turned out, these tripled charges, which I again emphasize I had not consented to, were not for XXXX condo, but XXXX, and they had added on another {$800.00} in " transaction '' costs or fees. Once I'd recorded my intent to dispute the credit card charge with Citi Bank, I called XXXX. I told them I only needed XXXX condo, not XXXX, and I had not and would not agree to an {$800.00} service add on. The gentleman I talked to said he could do nothing, that he would have to talk to the condominium company to see if I could change my reservation from XXXX condos to XXXX. I told him that wasn't good enough, that I had not agreed to nor would I pay the {$800.00} in transaction fees they'd gratuitously added as a charge on my credit card. In this regard I should add that their webpage claims they charge no " reservation fees. '' https : XXXX XXXX ; XXXX ; XXXX [ XXXX ] ; XXXX ; XXXX ; XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX  ; XXXX ; XXXX ; XXXX XXXX USD XXXX  & XXXX I then called the condo renters, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I was told by the desk XXXX that there was nothing they could do since my agreement was with XXXX. The person I talked to did add that in the future I should deal directly with them. Under the circumstances this was not only useless information, but unwelcome as well since it was becoming quite clear that I was caught up in a web of anonymity and denial. 

I then called the customer service representative with Citi Bank. She was actually quite sympathetic. I asked what I could do to reverse the charges. She said that my objection to the charges was already recorded and that under the circumstances she thought XXXX would not pursue collection since I'd already openly disputed the charges and made my unhappiness with their process known to them. I told her that I wouldn't do business with XXXX under any circumstance, for to my experience they were more about hiding behind deniability and defrauding people than they were about providing online travel services. I believe I also reminded her that I found it very troubling that XXXX could bill my card for a charge that I'd had no opportunity to review prior to the charge becoming my obligation to honor. She said the charges to my account could not be dropped, that XXXX had to have equal opportunity to make its case. She also said that I would have another opportunity to dispute the charges before Citi made its final determination as to the legitimacy of the charges. 

In early XXXX, I was sent an email notice from Citi Bank that if I wanted to add anything to my original dispute, I would have to do it by XX/XX/XXXX, or there about. 

I sent them material not unlike what I've related above. I also added that while the electronic business world has some obvious conveniences, it also contains some very troubling landmines for consumers. I used the example of a person walking into a retail store to buy a shirt that was advertised in the store window for {$30.00}. The retail clerk would probably thank you for your business and offer to wrap the shirt. He'd probably promise to be right back with your purchase. If, however, he came back with XXXX  shirts and a transaction fee for wrapping the shirts that, in all, came to XXXX times the advertised price in the window for XXXX shirt, every person would surely feel bamboozled and walk out of the store, probably uttering and oath or two on the way out. But by contrast in the electronic world the customer apparently has practically no rights, only obligations to pay what the retailer demands, without regard to the rightfulness of the charges. 

A couple of days ago Citi informed me that it had reviewed my dispute with XXXX. They told me they were awarding XXXX {$2400.00} of my money, money it claims I owe them even though I did not use their services and had contested their inflated charges the moment they were made known to me. 

I once again called Citi Bank dispute personnel. I asked them if they'd read my appeal, and what information they'd received from XXXX that contradicted my representation of events. I talked to XXXX people, the second a " supervisor.  '' Both said that I had no choice but to pay since I'd signed a nonrefundable agreement. I reminded them that I had always been prepared to pay the rate quoted on their web page, which was {$270.00} a night for XXXX night, but would not pay a bill XXXX times that amount since I had never agreed to these wildly inflated charges and actually had no knowledge of them until after they appeared on my credit card statement. The real problem, as it had been from the beginning, was that the online retailers refused to discuss the charges or modify them. Instead, as I've said, they've hid behind anonymity and denial in thwarting any reasonable resolution. I also asked the Citi Bank supervisor why, if as they were now telling me that I never had any rights, they'd strung me along for 2 months in the hope that some form of justice would be served and that I at last would have some say in to whom my money belonged. Citi Bank has determined that {$2400.00} of my retirement income belongs to them and XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for exaggerated services I never requested and never used. 

In the end, I told them that I was, in effect, being robbed by XXXX for services and costs that were clearly deceptive and fraudulent and that they, by their actions, were complicit in the thievery. 

The supervisor, once I asked to speak to her superior, said there was no chance for further review. When I asked to review the documents XXXX had submitted in its defense, she simply kept repeating, as before, that I owed them and XXXX {$2400.00} because the charges were nonrefundable. I asked if the charges had been XXXX times that which was advertised on their webpage, rather than XXXX  times greater, would I still responsible? She did not reply. 

As I've attempted to defend myself from XXXX charges, I discovered on a website called XXXX that over the last 12 moths less than 8 percent of the reviews of XXXX have been positive. Many of the reviews, one star, relate experiences similar to mine. One might begin to question why these people are allowed to stay in business to prey off the public. Even more troubling is why Citi Bank continues to act as bag man for this shoddy operation.