Consumer complaint received 2022-02-18
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: LA
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service
Sub-product: Domestic (US) money transfer
Issue: Other transaction problem

Complaint:
My complaint is regarding an unauthorized XXXX EFT dispute case with Citibank. Details of the case : Transaction date : XX/XX/XXXX Transaction amount : {$1800.00} 1. My money was stolen via a fraudulent person-to-person XXXX transaction, which falls under Regulation E protection according to CFPB. 
2. Citi did not conduct a reasonable investigation regarding my case initiated on XX/XX/XXXX, as they reported that the EFT in question was initiated in accordance with your instructions when I expressly told them ( and swore under oath on a attached declaration ) that it was not. In addition, Citibank employees did not provide me with information on how to submit supporting documents and information provided to me at my request at a later date was repeatedly incorrect. 
3. Citibanks rules can not afford lesser protection than federal law 4. A man approached me on XX/XX/XXXX and requested to make a phone call to his sister from my cell phone ( that turned out to be the access device, although I am not certain because I am not totally sure how he actually initiated the transfer ). I granted him permission to make that phone call and only that phone call. I did not grant him authority to use my phone for any other purpose whatsoever. That same man ( whose name and phone number were on the transaction ), while in possession of my phone ( that he was granted permission to use for that phone call only and exclusively ) proceeded to initiate the EFT of {$1800.00} from my checking account. He therefore initiated this EFT without any permission from me or awareness by me. I did not receive any goods, services, benefit or currency/compensation in exchange for this {$1800.00}. I gave Citibank timely notice of this fraud, within 10-30 minutes of when it occurred. The man who approached me asked to use my phone for a phone call which I granted him license to do. He then asked if I could XXXX {$20.00} to his sister for gas money to come pick him up. I continued to hold the phone and entered the email address that he told me to send {$20.00} dollars ( solely {$20.00}. As he gave me {$20.00} cash ; which I later returned b/c the transfer did not go through ). The transfer did not go through. I closed the banking app. The man then asked to call his sister again from my phone. While I am not certain, I assume that this fraud occurred in one of two ways : 1 ) the man either saw me enter my password when I attempted to send the {$20.00} that did not go through and then logged in from his own device immediately after I walked away and transferred {$1800.00} to himself or 2 ) he somehow opened the banking app when he was holding my phone a second time to make the phone call to his sister. I did not with my own hand authorize the {$1800.00} nor grant him permission to enter my banking app or send any money/initiate any transaction. This is therefore an unauthorized EFT and is covered by CFPB Regulation E. 

In summary, my claim falls under the protection of Federal Regulation E by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), pursuant to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. 
As you can see in the attached screenshots, I have attempted to contact the phone number on the XXXX transaction in question. I called the number and left a voicemail when no one picked up. I then texted the number ( see screenshot ) and asked if the phone belonged to the name on the transaction, which the person responded Yes. So then I told him that he had stolen {$1800.00} from me and to please return it via XXXX and he responded Wrong person. How could it be the wrong person if his name and number are on the XXXX transaction and he confirmed that it is indeed his phone number? If he doesnt have it, who does? This proves that this is fraud. As detailed in the police report, there should be security footage of this happening. I called Citi immediately after this occurred and changed my password. I then immediately filed my initial police report, and submitted more information as soon as I could. 
In addition : I received different information each time that I have called Citi regarding this fraud ( which I believe is at least 7 times now ). 
First calls on XX/XX/XXXX ( at XXXX am XXXX, immediately after fraud occurred between XXXX and XXXX am or so according to my call log ; when the man who stole from me used my phone to call his sister at the number XXXX as given in the police report ). After walking away from the man who stole from me ( as I did not realize at that time that any funds whatsoever had left my bank account ), my boyfriend suggested that I check my bank balance because he felt as if the man who asked to use my phone was suspicious. I then discovered that my Citibank app had been uninstalled without my knowledge. So I began to panic and called XXXX ( the number on the back of my Citi credit card, to make sure it was a legitimate Citi number ). I called that number at XXXX am EST. I called Citi again numerous times at XXXX that evening. I then called XXXX and was given a case number. I told the agent that the {$1800.00} transaction was fraud, but that the {$650.00} transaction was my monthly rent payment and was legitimate ( interesting how the thief stole the exact amount that ( in addition to my pre-scheduled rent payment ) equals {$2500.00}, which I have now learned is the daily XXXX limit on my account ). I then called Citi again the next morning at XXXX am XXXX ( still XX/XX/XXXX ) to follow up and was told that there would be an investigation. No further information was given to me. I was not told to submit the police report that I had created that very night ( see attached ). 
XX/XX/XXXX : I called Citi again to give the police report number that was assigned to my case and I again asked what my next steps would be and was told there will be an investigation and they will send you a letter in the mail. I was NOT told to submit the police report itself. 
XX/XX/XXXX : I was credited the money back ( apparently provisionally ) so I assumed all was well. I was never contacted for any more details. To my knowledge, Citi never asked for or saw the police report. 
XX/XX/XXXX : I received the postal letter stating that the credit to my account was provisional. 
XX/XX/XXXX : I got an email stating that there was a new secure message in my account. ( Why did I receive this email on XX/XX/XXXX if the message was dated XX/XX/XXXX? ) XX/XX/XXXX : I noticed the email and read the secure message reporting that the money was taken out of my account again stating based on our research and the information you provided. What research was done? I was not provided with a way to send evidence. I called Citi immediately and spoke with XXXX, who told me that I should submit the police report etc to XXXX which I did. G did not tell me that the case was closed. 
XX/XX/XXXX : I called Citi again to make sure that my documents were received and spoke with XXXX, who informed me that the case was closed, and so we started and appeal and I was given a case number and password for the case ( Why was I not given a password for the case when I initially submitted it on XX/XX/XXXX? ). I told XXXX that I had submitted supporting documents to XXXX. He said that the submitted documents would be filed under the new case number. I emailed the documents under the new case number just to be safe ( see emails attached ). I then noticed the email dated XX/XX/XXXX saying that the case was closed. ( Why did I receive the email notification on XX/XX/XXXX when the message is dated XX/XX/XXXX? ) XX/XX/XXXX : I called Citi again and spoke with XXXX to see if the documents had been received at the email address under my new case number. XXXX told me : No, you cant email documents for an appeal. Those have to be sent by mail. He gave me the address and then said No, actually you can fax them to XXXX. He told me to send my documents along with my case number, card number, disputed transaction date and amount, the reason for my appeal and my signature to debit card billing dispute unit. Why did neither XXXX nor XXXX ( nor anyone else I spoke with ) tell me this in my previous calls? Did they even know this? I asked XXXX, How do I know that what youre telling me is even true when Ive gotten so many different answers? I asked him if he could send me the instructions for the appeal process in writing and he said that he could not. Why not? Because they dont exist? 
XX/XX/XXXX : I submitted a fax to XXXX as soon as I was possibly able to after being told what I hoped was finally the correct information. I called Citi to follow up and asked to speak with a supervisor. I was connected with XXXX She informed me that I had yet again sent my supporting documents to the incorrect place, and that I should send them to the Client Research Team XXXX XXXX. I again asked How do I know that what youre telling me is even true when Ive gotten so many different answers? and she responded Maam, I am a supervisor. I asked if my documents would be received in time to be reviewed by the Citi Research Team if I faxed them on XX/XX/XXXX and Delight responded that they would because my case would be open until XX/XX/XXXX ( 10 business days ). 

XX/XX/XXXX : I submitted a nearly 50-page fax of supporting documents to XXXX. 

XX/XX/XXXX : I called Citi and asked to speak with a supervisor. I was connected with XXXX who told me that my 2nd dispute had also been denied and closed and that the documents that I submitted on XX/XX/XXXX were NOT attached to this dispute as XXXX had told me they would be. I asked to receive a copy of the documents used in Citi 's " investigation '' of my dispute as that is my right. She reported that they would be emailed to me ( I have not received them as of the time of this writing ). I asked to speak with her manager and mysteriously the call was disconnected ( not by me ). 
I called back again and asked to speak with a supervisor and was connected with XXXX He confirmed that my second dispute had been denied and that my documents had not been reviewed. I told him that I had submitted nearly 50 pages of supporting documents. I asked again where I should send my supporting documents for new case number and he told me " per M '' that the number was XXXX. He said that Citi usually accepts supporting documentation for debit card disputes and not XXXX disputes and therefore why he was uncertain of where to send supporting documentation. I asked him if it would be enough time if I submitted my supporting documents again on XX/XX/XXXX ( as this is the soonest that I could do so ) and he said that it would. 

I told XXXX that according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 's XX/XX/XXXX updates to Regulation XXXX, this fraudulent and unauthorized transaction falls under their protection and it is obvious that it is fraud and unauthorized for reasons including ( but not limited to ) : 1 ) This is the largest XXXX transaction I have ever completed ( to my knowledge ) and is outside of my spending pattern. I was outside of my home city ( I live in XXXX XXXX and incident occurred in XXXX ) 2 ) As you can see by my record with Citi, I pay my bills on time and have very good credit 3 ) I do not have any other disputed XXXX charges 4 ) My apartment rent of {$650.00} per month has been a scheduled XXXX payment ( debited on the first of each month ) since summer XXXX ( so it was debited by XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, the day the {$1800.00} was stolen ). The {$1800.00} that was stolen from me seemed to be a random, uneven amount until I realized that {$650.00} + {$1800.00} = {$2500.00}. Which Ive now learned is the maximum amount that can be debited via XXXX per day from my account. **That is not a coincidence**. Clearly this man was experienced enough at fraud to send himself the maximum amount that he possibly could. Does it really make sense that that would just happen to be the amount that I would send to someone I had never sent a payment to at XXXX in the morning? No. Because I didnt send it or authorize it. He did. 
5 ) I called Citi immediately after I noticed the money was missing 6 ) I changed my password immediately because I didnt know if the man who stole from me now had it whereas I dont think I had ever changed my password with Citi before XXXX ) Ive called Citi more than ten times now and spent hours of time and effort trying to recoup this money. I spent over 80 minutes on the phone with Citi on XX/XX/XXXX alone. 
8 ) Im a licensed social worker, and theft or fraud are a violation of the NASW Code of Ethics ( the governing body of the social work profession ). To lie about this issue would be me risking my license and career that Ive spent years earning and building XXXX ) I posted about this incident on XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ( see screenshot ) warning my hundreds of followers about the dangers of letting others near your smartphone, which I was previously unaware of. Many people commented that they would have done the same thing ( ie : allowed someone who claimed to need help to use their phone ) These are not senior citizens who are unfamiliar with technology either. 
10 ) I contacted the man who received the transaction to request that the money be returned and filed a police report with identifying information for this person 11 ) I filed a police report immediately after I realized that money was taken from my account ( see the date and time of the initial police report that I later supplemented with more evidence/information ) I would assist in any way necessary to see that this man ( who seems to be clearly identifiable ) is prosecuted ( as I swore under oath on the declaration page attached ) When I spoke with XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, he asked me if someone had gained unauthorized access to my computer. I answered yes at this time because a smartphone is a computer ( aka the access device ). 
I realized then that the way that the question is phrased makes Citi less inclined to rule in the customers favor on such Regulation E issues because most people do not have their laptops ( or other devices traditionally referred to as computers on their person ) and traditional computers are probably less likely to be used as access devices for fraud/initiating unauthorized transactions : ( as apparently is becoming more frequent according to stories like these : https : XXXX # ) As mentioned at length above, this unauthorized transaction falls under Regulation E protection for many reasons. 

In summary : Im very disappointed with the way that Citi has handled this. It seems that the dispute and appeal process must be purposefully obfuscated so that customers do not know what to do. In my case, Im a long-time, honest, and loyal customer who always pays on time and have recommended Citi to many others. Im a social worker in healthcare and {$1800.00} is not an amount I can just take lightly. I was trying to help someone who said their phone had died and needed a ride home. I absolutely did not authorize this transaction. This transfer was not sent to the recipient in accordance with my instructions. As you can see in the screenshots, the man at the name and number listed on the XXXX transaction denies even receiving this transaction. If Citi cares about preventing fraud, why does the Citi app not require users to enter/re-enter their PIN ( as a further security measure ) before allowing large sums of money to be sent? This incident would never have happened if this simple change was made. My XXXX is literally more secure than Citis XXXX feature apparently. 
I asked to be contacted if Citi needed any more information regarding the case and I have never been contacted to this day. I highly doubt that the documents that I sent once again will be reviewed by Citi, and therefore they have not completed the reasonable investigation required by CFPB. They have yet to furnish the documents that I requested regarding their investigation of my case, and I find it extremely suspect that the steps to the dispute/appeal process are apparently neither known to most/all Citi employees and can not be provided to consumers who request them ( either verbally or in writing ).

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation