Consumer complaint received 2019-09-26
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: PA
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Sub-issue: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement

Complaint:
This complaint concerns handling by Citi bank of the disputed transaction on XX/XX/2019 with XXXX XXXX  XXXX in the amount of {$4700.00}. I believe that conflicting information provided by the bank and its slow response results in my inability to benefit from the consumer protections provided by The Fair Credit Billing Act. 

Timeline of the Dispute : XX/XX/2019 Transaction in the amount of {$4700.00} with XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2019 XXXX XXXX refused to correct damages they caused and to complete the project after just two days of work. The parts they supposedly did are incorrect and unusable. 

XX/XX/2019  Filed a billing dispute regarding the transaction. 

XX/XX/2019  XXXX XXXXXXXX sent me a letter offering {$2000.00} refund out of {$4700.00} if I waive all my rights of further refund and damages. I declined this as nothing was actually delivered correctly. Contractors own pictures illustrate this. Moreover this itemized receipt is completely arbitrary and has no contractual basis. 

XX/XX/2019  Citi informs me that they have received response from the merchant and that I will get further instructions within 10 business days. 

XX/XX/2019 Twenty-two days after receiving it, Citi uploaded the response from the merchant and instructions how to continue the dispute. They requested Proof of what was expected versus what was received. Examples of proof would be a sales slip, certificate of quality, newspaper advertisement, or an itemized bill. Portions of the response uploaded by Citi, such as materials receipts, were completely illegible. 

XX/XX/2019  Submitted my response to Citi. I pointed out that the contractor in his own response to the Bank does not dispute that the work was just started ( see Page 15 of their response ), though they claim it was us who did not let them continue. Regarding the items the contractor claims to have completed, I have supplied images clearly  showing that their work was totally unusable and must be completely redone. Even in the pictures XXXX XXXXXXXX uploaded, supposedly showing their work, one can see falling out recessed lights, holes in the walls they caused and fixed with already cracked spackle, uneven tiles with quickset bulging from the joints etc. But they likely knew that banks do not analyze technical images. 

XX/XX/2019 Citi sent me a letter saying they cant accept images as the proof of incorrect delivery and requested the following : Proof that the merchandise/service was not as described. This proof needs to be a review from a second similar merchant, based on the invoice, indicating the work performed by the original merchant was incorrectly or unnecessarily completed. This merchant opinion needs to be written on their letterhead or include a copy of their business card. Due to timeframe issues please return the requested information by XX/XX/2019 since this will be the last day we would be able to assist you. Due to the holidays I was given 5 business days to find a contractor and  supply the letter. 

XX/XX/2019 After multiple calls to confirm with Citi Dispute Department about the letter they expect, I have uploaded a letter from an independent contractor stating that the work done by XXXX XXXX was done incorrectly and that it will actually cost more to repair the damage ( {$6100.00} ) than the total amount of the disputed transaction. For example, the proper way to fix huge holes they made in the ceiling to incorrectly install recessed lights is replacing of damaged portions of drywall ceiling. Similarly for other supposedly delivered parts of the project they were not delivered and must be completely redone. 

XX/XX/2019 I received a letter from Citi thanking me for additional documentation and claiming it was submitted to the Merchant. 

XX/XX/2019  I saw an unexplained credit of {$2000.00}. Since I was expecting a credit of {$4700.00}, I was concerned that the bank did not see my " second opinion letter '' and dropped disputing of {$2700.00}, I called dispute department and Citi representative in a recorded conversation assured me that the whole of {$4700.00} is still disputed and that I have a strong case. The agent explained that the dispute was split into two parts : {$2000.00} which the merchant seemingly does not dispute and {$2700.00}. The merchant can either accept the chargeback or ask for arbitration by Mastercard. 

XX/XX/2019 I received a letter dated XX/XX/2019 saying the following We write to inform you that we have received your response and we have continued to dispute the charge {$2000.00} with the merchant as they only willing to issue partial refund. As a result, we have credited your account again for the amount in question and we are unable to assist you for remaining amount. Since we have not received a valid proof of what was expected versus what you received. If you wish to pursue this matter, please contact the merchant directly. 

XX/XX/2019, I called dispute department again and the agent, in a recorded conversation, claimed that my second opinion letter while received on XX/XX/XXXX was unfortunately scanned into system on XX/XX/2019, after the deadline, so it was not considered by the letter dated XX/XX/2019 dropping the {$2700.00} part of the dispute. Note that there was no need of any additional information from me to dispute the {$2000.00} part of the transaction, as they could use Merchants own letter from XX/XX/2019 that he uploaded as part of the second presentment. The agent said she submitted a ticket to investigators to clarify about possible arbitration for the {$2700.00} part of the dispute. 

9/16/2016 Dispute department agent in a phone call said that while she cant be certain, but if she were to guess the whole amount of the transaction, {$4700.00}, is still disputed.

XX/XX/2019 I received the following letter from Citi. The letter is dated XX/XX/XXXX but scanned 3 days later. We reinstated conditional credit to your account in the amount {$2000.00} which will appear under the merchant 's name on your subsequent billing statement. We continue to work with the merchant or their bank to obtain a permanent credit for this charge. Please note, the merchant has until XX/XX/2019 to get back to us. If they will not accept this charge, we will notify you of the reason. You can view these updates in Account Online anytime. We hope this information is helpful. Please disregard any incorrect information you may have been received. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. Thank you for contacting us. 


The letter still does not address the {$2700.00} part of the transaction or why the " second opinion letter '' from XX/XX/2019 was not used to dispute the {$2700.00} part of the transaction. Since XXXX XXXX is a tiny business with nonexistent business address, my best chance of getting back anything is an arbitration by Mastercard using all evidence I supplied within timeframes set by Citi bank. I think its fundamentally unfair to ignore the letter I sent on XX/XX/XXXX just because it was scanned on XX/XX/XXXX, especially considering multiple times Citi delayed their own responses and conflicting messaging in recorded phone conversations.

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