Product: Credit card or prepaid card

I had filed the original chargeback claim on the phone on XX/XX/2020 for two transactions with merchant XXXX XXXX XXXX   on my credit card. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX billed on XX/XX/2020, for {$500.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX billed on XX/XX/2020, for {$500.00}. 

This was 43 days after the first transaction on the credit card. 
I received a reply from CapitalOne on XX/XX/2020 ( Refer Exhibit 1 ). There was no mention of the receipt of transaction provided to them by the merchant nor any attachment I could refer to in this mail. I  responded on XX/XX/2020 ( Refer Exhibit 2 ) in line with the general contents of this letter, that neither I nor anyone authorized by me had signed for or received the merchandise/service. This may have not been specific to CapitalOnes expectation of responding to the claim made by the merchant in their rebuttal that I had willingly signed the receipt of transaction document. If I was not privy to the merchants rebuttal to the bank at this stage, how was I supposed to respond specifically to the receipt of transaction or documents given to them by the merchant with my forged signature? 
It was brought to my notice later by other banks also handling my chargeback claim that the merchant ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) was providing receipts with my forged signature as a rebuttal to my chargeback claims. It is very unfair that CapitalOne did not provide me this document in their XX/XX/XXXX correspondence in order for me to verify and counter the merchant. 
As soon as I got to know of the forged signature documents provided to other banks, I immediately sent a follow-up mail to CapitalOne on XX/XX/2020 giving evidence of the forgery ( Refer Exhibit 3 ). This mail was in continuation of my original chargeback claim of XX/XX/2020, and should have been considered as supporting evidence to my initial claim dated XX/XX/2020. 
In the meantime and much later on XX/XX/2020, I received the merchants documents from CapitalOne. The transaction receipt had my forged signature on it ( Refer Exhibit 4 ). I immediately sent CapitalOne a detailed response ( Refer Exhibit 5 ) countering the merchant and brought to the banks notice the fraud & forged signature documents provided by the merchant. I requested CapitalOne to  compare my signature on file with them, with the forged receipt of transaction provided by the merchant. The bank clearly chose to overlook the forgery and fraud done in my case. To make matters worse, the credit card mentioned in the receipt of transaction was incorrect and was not mine. My credit card ends with XXXX whereas the merchant has provided transaction details of credit card ending XXXX ( Refer Exhibit 4 ). This credit card does not belong to me. So how did CapitalOne accept this document from the merchant and decide the case in favor of the merchant? 
I was surprised to see the reply by CapitalOne on XXXX XXXX stating the case is closed ( Refer Exhibit 6 ) because the chargeback claim was outside the 60 days of the transaction. This is absolutely incorrect if the date of filing is noted. 
I made a final appeal to CapitalOne on XX/XX/2020 to re-open my case ( Refer Exhibit 7 ). The bank responded stating the case was closed and would not entertain any further requests on this case ( Refer Exhibit 8 ). 
In my view, CapitalOne has decided the case in favor of the merchant based on fraudulent/forged and invalid documents. I strongly believe the bank was unfair and high handed in evaluating my case.