Product: Credit card

YOUR COMPLAINT On XX/XX/year> I had two credit card accounts with Capital One that I didn't want to continue paying the high interest rate on. So I got a personal loan from my credit union, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, in order to pay off the two credit cards. After obtaining the address from Capital One as to where to send the payments to, I waited approximately three weeks and then I called my credit union to check to see if the payments had cleared. At this time my credit union said that none of the payments had cleared my account as of yet and that I should contact Capital One to ask for a Payment Dispute to investigate where the payments were at this point. So I called Capital One and asked for the Payment Dispute in XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX and they advised me to go online and do the Payment Disputes which I did. The online system said it would be up to thirty days for the disputes to be processed. I called my credit union back to advise them of this and they said they didn't want to wait that long so they called Capital One to discuss the issue with them and found out that the payment address that Capital One had given us was incorrect. We then got the correct address and advised to Capital One that we would cancel the checks that were sent to the incorrect address and would resubmit new check payments to them. My credit union called me around the middle of XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX and advised that the checks had cleared the account. So I called Capital One to have the accounts closed and I asked the representative if there were any pending disputes, flags or pending transactions on the account and they advised no. They also said I had a refund due to me on each credit card account and that they would send that out to me and I would receive it within 7-10 business days. I spoke to XXXX : ID # : XXXX. I then called back the same day and spoke to XXXX : ID # : XXXX to confirm again that there were no pending disputes, flags or pending transactions on the accounts and she said no as well. I then inquired if XXXX had initiated the refunds that he said I was due and she said yes he had. I also asked her to note my account regarding it not having any pending disputes, flags or pending transactions and she said she did. I called my credit union to advise that the accounts were closed on the same day and they advised I should call Capital One back to request a Letter of Closure and a {$0.00} balance owed. So I called Capital One right back to request this information and spoke to XXXX : ID # : XXXX. He advised that he would have this letter sent out to me stating that the accounts were closed with a {$0.00} balance on each account. He further confirmed that the notes had been put into my account regarding no pending disputes, flags or pending transactions were on my accounts. Approximately a month later I received an email from Capital One stating that I have balances owed on the two credit cards. I immediately called Capital One and spoke to 13 different agents who were rude, kept transferring me in circles or hung up on me. At which time I called back and asked to speak to a English speaking supervisor. After discussing that the issue would be escalated to corporate she advised she would submit for a credit given and a {$0.00} on the accounts to be given due to customer service errors and misleading the consumer ( me ) with incorrect information. She based this off of several notes of where other representatives had confirmed that there were no pending disputes, flags or pending transactions on my accounts. Another month goes by and I see that the accounts were still showing I owed the balance on them so I called again and spoke to a male supervisor in the USA who spoke English. He advised that they had sent out correspondence to me requesting more information and I advised I had not gotten that. He stated that the refund should not have happened and that it was a provisional credit on a dispute. He asked if I had cashed the checks and I said yes, like any other person would, so he said the debt was valid and that I owed it. I addressed the fact that the previous person said they would escalate this to corporate to request that a credit be given and a {$0.00} balance on the accounts to be given due to customer service errors and misleading the consumer ( me ) with incorrect information. He didn't care and said that he was as high as it goes as far as who I could speak to regarding this issue. I then said do you believe that the Capital One agents should be held accountable for what they say and do and do you believe that the consumer should have to pay for the Capital One agents mistakes at which he dodged those two questions. He just advised that it is a debt that I owe. I asked if you are as high as I can go to speak with can you listen to the recordings to hear what they said to me and he said he read the notes but couldn't listen to the calls as that was up to those agents supervisors to listen to and address and he said they would just be spoken to regarding the situation. Overall I feel that Capital One Agents should be held accountable and that under the UDAAP ( unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices ) they should be held to those standards of being accountable by the providers of financial products and services. I feel that I should not have been misled or given incorrect information by numerous Capital One Agents and being that they have our personal information at their fingertips that they should be more careful as to what they advise to their customers or how it effects their finances and credit. Also, capitol one did not send certified mail and I NEVER received correspondence as they falsely claim, I ask where is the proof? Other than their arbitrary claim they sent it. There's no signatures by me nor certified mail. Capitol one claims there's no such call that my bank did talk to them and my bank agent can give statement that they did. Capital one ignored the fact another supervising agent on a call had told me that the agent should not have issued the checks to me and that he could in fact, see that there was a ( dispute ) there and was not sure how he could even issue checks. And also said that the other agents could see three was something there and not sure why they were telling me what they said. At which I stated, do I trust you of XXXX other agents telling me something different. Capital one has cherry picked only the info they want to show and has mislead me repeatedly without recourse for their actions. Under FTC ... capital one has breached these clauses... Deceptive Acts or Practices A three-part test is used to determine whether a representation, omission, or practice is deceptive. This test was first laid out in the FTC Policy Statement on Deceptive Acts and Practices.8 First, the representation, omission, or practice must mislead or be likely to mislead the consumer. Second, the consumers interpretation of the representation, omission, or practice must be reasonable under the circumstances. Third, the misleading representation, omission, or practice must be material. 9 As a general matter, the standards for establishing deception less burdensome than the standards for establishing unfairness because, under deception, there is no requirement of substantial injury or the likelihood of substantial injury, or the other elements of unfairness related to consumer injury. The following discusses all three of the elements necessary to establish deception.10 There must be a representation, omission, or practice that misleads or is likely to mislead the consumer. An act or practice may be found to be deceptive if there is a representation, omission, or practice that misleads or is likely to mislead a consumer. Deception is not limited to situations in which a consumer has already been misled. Instead, an act or practice may be found to be deceptive if it is likely to mislead consumers. A representation may be in the form of express or implied claims or promises and may be written or oral. Omission of information may be deceptive if disclosure of the omitted information is necessary to prevent a consumer from being misled. An individual statement, representation, or omission is not evaluated in isolation to determine if it is misleading, but rather in the context of the entire advertisement, transaction, or course of dealing. Acts or practices that have the potentialto be deceptive include : making misleading cost or price claims ; using bait-and-switch techniques; offering to provide a product or service that is not in fact available ; omitting material limitations or conditions from an offer ; selling a product unfit for the purposes for which it is sold ; and failing to provide promised services. The act or practice must be considered from the perspective of the reasonable consumer. In determining whether an act or practice is misleading, the consumers interpretation of or reaction to the representation, omission, or practice must be reasonable under the circumstances. In other words, whether an act or practice is deceptive depends on how a reasonable member of the target audience would interpret the marketing material. When representations or marketing practices are targeted to a specific audience, such as the elderly or the financially unsophisticated, the communication is reviewed from the point of view of a reasonable member of that group. ____________________ 10 Clear and Conspicuous Disclosures When evaluating the three-part test for deception, the four Ps should be considered : prominence, presentation, placement, and proximity. First, is the statement prominent enough for the consumer to notice? Second, is the information presented in an easy to understand format that does not contradict other information in the package and at a time when the consumers attention is not distracted elsewhere? Third, is the placement of the information in a location where consumers can be expected to look or hear? Finally, is the information in close proximity to the claim it qualifies? More information is available at : XXXX XXXX XXXX If a representation conveys two or more meanings to reasonable consumers and one meaning is misleading, the representation may be deceptive. Moreover, a consumers interpretation or reaction may indicate that an act or practice is deceptive under the circumstances, even if the consumers interpretation is not shared by a majority of the consumers in the relevant class, so long as a significant minority of such consumers is misled. Written disclosures may be insufficient to correct a misleading statement or representation, particularly where the consumer is directed away from qualifying limitations in the text or is counseled that reading the disclosures is unnecessary. Likewise, oral disclosures or fine print are generally insufficient to cure a misleading headline or prominent written representation. Finally, a deceptive act or practice can not be cured by subsequent truthful disclosures. The representation, omission, or practice must be material. A representation, omission, or practice is material if it is likely to affect a consumers decision to purchase or use a product or service. In general, information about costs, benefits, or restrictions on the use or availability of a product or service is material. When express claims are made with respect to a financial product or service, the claims will be presumed to be material. While intent to deceive is not a required element of proving that an act or practice is deceptive, the materiality of an implied claim will be presumed if it can be shown that the institution intended that the consumer draw certain conclusions based upon the claim. Claims made with knowledge that they are false will also be presumed to be material. Omissions will be presumed to be material when the financial institution knew or should have known that the consumer needed the omitted information to make an informed choice about the product or service UNDER THESE RULES... capital one has failed those standards and agents are held to that equal standard when contradicting a statements are given, causing the lay consumer distress and confusion on practice and policies of capital one Document to be sent if needed and my bank to be notified of capitol one stating they do not have a call recording when my bank in fact talked to them.