Product: Credit card

On XX/XX/XXXX, I paid XXXX {$3900.00} for the specific service of filing a lawsuit against my employer XXXX Supply Chain. XXXX filed charge number XXXX with the XXXX on my behalf and obtained the right-to-sue letter on XX/XX/XXXX, but they then refused to proceed with the next step of filing the lawsuit, as initially agreed. 

Due to XXXXs lack of support, I was forced to write my own position statement, which I then provided to them. However, when XXXX uploaded this statement to the XXXX portal, it contained multiple errorserrors that a competent law firm should have been able to avoid. This demonstrates XXXX 's lack of professionalism and due diligence in handling a service I paid them to manage accurately and professionally. 

After the XXXX issued the right-to-sue letter, XXXX was supposed to file a lawsuit against XXXX Supply Chain, but they did not follow through. Instead, they allowed the XXXX period to lapse, which disqualified me from pursuing the lawsuit in court. This failure voided the purpose of my initial service agreement with XXXX, as the primary service I paid forthe filing of a lawsuitwas never delivered. 

I subsequently requested a refund from XXXX on both XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, but my requests were denied. XXXX claimed they only handle XXXX charges, not lawsuits, contradicting the original terms of our agreement. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I initiated a dispute with Discover regarding the {$3900.00} charge from XXXX, as they had failed to deliver the services as agreed. Initially, Discover ruled in my favor, and I received a credit for the disputed amount. However, Discover later reversed this decision in WHLAWs favor, despite the substantial evidence of WHLAWs failure to fulfill their contractual obligations. I was not notified of this reversal and only discovered it upon seeing the charge reapplied to my account. 

Following the reversal, I contacted Discover Bank to ask why they ruled in XXXX favor and asked them to reopen the dispute because XXXX submitted fabricated documentation that was created after I opened a dispute with discover bank - proof attached. 

After I initiated the dispute with Discover on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX retroactively updated their Case Status app on XX/XX/XXXX to include a fabricated summary of events, falsely claiming that filing a lawsuit was not part of their services. This contradicted our initial agreement, yet XXXX supplied this fabricated document to Discover, which led Discover to rule in XXXX 's favor. I submitted screenshots to Discover showing that XXXX added these fabricated records to the portal on XXXX I had already opened the dispute on XXXX Discover still did not reopen the investigation despite this evidence of manipulation. 

Additionally, XXXX removed the preparing for lawsuit step from the app. Its important to clarify that XXXX has complete control over the Case Status app, which is merely a customizable communication tool, not a legal portal, and no legal actions can occur within it. Any legitimate legal actions, such as filing the lawsuit, would have taken place in a court of law, which XXXX was supposed to handle but failed to do. Despite providing Discover with documentation of WHLAWs retroactive changes, Discover disregarded this evidence and maintained their ruling in XXXX 's favor. 

All of this evidence will be provided to you in the attachment section. 

I have repeatedly requested that Discover reopen the dispute, citing WHLAWs retroactive changes and lack of transparency. Despite these requests, Discover has not provided adequate information or the opportunity to appeal the decision. 

I am seeking assistance to address Discovers lack of appropriate action in this dispute process and to reopen the case for a thorough review of WHLAWs fraudulent actions, documentation, and failure to provide the services I paid for. 

I am now requesting that Discover reopen their investigation, as WHLAWs actions reveal clear fraudulent intent. As a loyal Discover customer, I trusted Discover to protect me from such deceptive practices. This experience has been deeply disappointing. I, along with many other victims, have been forced to report XXXX XXXXo the Attorney General and the Arkansas Judiciarys Office of the Committee on Professional Conduct after being so viciously scammed. 

Please see below, I am not XXXX 's only victim. 

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX