Product: Credit card or prepaid card

XXXX XXXX operates several businesses, including one that conducts home inspections. He was a business associate of my realtor and friend, XXXX XXXX. I trusted XXXX XXXX based on this relationship and previous free advice XXXX XXXX provided to me during an insurance claim in XX/XX/XXXX. I contacted him in approximately XX/XX/XXXX for his general contracting services as a result of damage to my property from a storm in XX/XX/XXXX. I paid {$1200.00} to his personal XXXX account in two installments - the first on XX/XX/XXXX for {$1000.00} and then {$200.00} on the XXXX. He " advised '' me through the insurance process and visited my property to meet with the adjuster from my insurer on one occasion and then again with an engineer also sent by my insurer. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX sent me an invoice for {$2000.00} which included a credit of the money already paid ( {$1200.00} ) for " temporary roof repairs. '' When XXXX XXXX learned on XX/XX/XXXX, that the insurer approved the estimate he provided to me ( sent via email on XX/XX/XXXX ) in full - more than {$33000.00}, he decided that he wanted all of the money for profit and overhead and the roofing, which amounted to {$17000.00} in addition to the {$1200.00} already paid. I asked him several times to provide me with a detailed scope of work he intended to do once it became clear that he was not going to do everything in the estimate. We discussed having him " sub-contract '' some of the work to me so that I could do things like paint the ceiling or other areas myself. This was agreeable to me except that I still wanted a clearly articulated scope for the roof work. I later learned through research I conducted in disputing this charge with my credit card company, that AZ law only allows a XXXX to collect the profit and overhead if they complete three or more trades. In this case, XXXX was only conducting roof work, and thus not entitled to the XXXX XXXX XXXX This is stated on page 2 of XXXX 's estimate. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX demanded that I pay him the full amount of {$17000.00} before XXXX. I explained there was no way I could because I didn't have the check yet and expressed concern because the work wasn't even going to be done until later the following week ( after XX/XX/XXXX ). He insisted that I pay half, which I did with my Chase credit card on the 2nd {$8500.00}. I became very concerned about XXXX XXXX 's intent and on XX/XX/XXXX, notified him via text that I didn't intend to use his XXXX  services. I offered alternate compensation and requested a refund of the amount paid ( {$8500.00} ) and told him that I would write a check for the agreed upon amount for his assistance essentially as a public adjuster once we agreed upon an amount. He became irate and ultimately sent me several extortion text messages after I disputed the charge with my bank on XX/XX/XXXX. He has NEVER done any work as a XXXX  other than take photographs and provide an estimate. He denied acting as a public adjuster in his response to Chase and thus all the money he retained - {$9700.00} is fraudulent because he didn't do the work for which I paid. I ultimately hired another licensed contractor to complete the roof work- XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

I filed the dispute on XX/XX/XXXX as NON-RECEIPT OF SERVICES and the dispute was denied on XX/XX/XXXX based on " incorrect code '' for the charge back. I contacted Chase immediately and filed an appeal using the " correct '' code canceled services, work not a described, which is not entirely accurate. Either way, the merchant sent me several threatening extortion texts and emails demanding payment. He is being charged with harassment and I am attempting to add fraud and extortion to the charges through the local PD. The resubmission was received by Chase on XX/XX/XXXX and they sent me a letter on XX/XX/XXXX stating that they were still reviewing. This is unacceptable. I did not receive the services I paid for both because I canceled them and the merchant never provided them. I should NOT be forced to pay a criminal extorting me because Chase can't figure out what happened. The merchant has also submitted altered documentation and is lying.