Consumer complaint received 2019-02-19
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: IL
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:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I purchased a {$1.00} bag of coffee from a company named XXXX XXXX. I thought this was the completion of my transaction, but on XX/XX/XXXX, I was charged {$68.00} for an additional four bags of coffee to be shipped to my home, which came to me as a surprise. Naturally, I disputed this charge through my credit company. It turns out that this was actually a subscription service, which was only clear deep in the terms of service of the original purchase. On XX/XX/XXXX my credit company informed me that their investigation led them to side with the merchant regarding this transaction. I immediately responded to my credit company, informing them clearly that I did not authorize this charge. On XX/XX/XXXX, my credit card company responded that they can not help me further and that I should speak with the company. 

From this point, I contacted the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) to report fraud, reported to the XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ), and the State Attorney General for the State of Alabama. These organizations followed up with XXXX XXXX regarding my complaint, to which XXXX XXXX agreed to a full refund of {$68.00}. During this entire process, XXXX XXXX has included deceptive material and have consistently made efforts to avoid any type of refund. XXXX XXXX   responded to the State Attorney General of Alabama and claimed to have refunded my money XX/XX/XXXX. As of XX/XX/XXXX, a refund has not been processed. I want to reemphasize that this company lied in a letter to the government agency, claiming later ( XX/XX/XXXX ) that they " can confirm that we tried to processed a refund '' ( indicating that indeed, they had not processed a refund ).

I called Citicard about a week or two ago and they confirmed that ( A ) no refund is currently being processed by XXXX XXXX, and that ( B ) XXXX XXXX is free to process a refund, regardless of chargeback status, at any time. I think it seems clear given the above that XXXX XXXX, although they have claimed in writing in both letters to the State Attorney General of Alabama and to the XXXX XXXX XXXX to have process a refund, yet clearly none has been processed. These actions seem immoral, unethical, and illegal. I encourage the CFPB to do a simple XXXX  search for " XXXX XXXX Scam '' and enjoy the plethora and history of clearly deceptive and fraudulent activity.

In XX/XX/XXXX, the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) signed into law the " Restoring Online Shopper 's Confidence Act '', which includes the following language ( source : ftc.gov ) : " This Act prohibits any post-transaction third party seller ( a seller who markets goods or services online through an initial merchant after a consumer has initiated a transaction with that merchant ) from charging any financial account in an Internet transaction unless it has disclosed clearly all material terms of the transaction and obtained the consumer 's express informed consent to the charge. The seller must obtain the number of the account to be charged directly from the consumer. '' In light of the above, I would like to emphasize from above a few points : ( A ) I did not authorize nor give express informed consent of the charge ( all instances show " Order Total '' as {$1.00} ) ( B ) The company did not clearly disclose terms of the transactions - XXXX XXXX ( when I called them in XX/XX/XXXX regarding this charge, they claim to have " multiple sign-up pages, some which are less clear about the terms '' - I was told this on the phone by what may have been a XXXX  woman ). ( C ) the charge to my account did NOT include information obtained directly from me ( I provided my credit card information only to process a single charge of {$1.00} ). 

I believe that, given the violation of the Act listed above, subsequent false claims to state, federal, and private agencies, and finally the methodical, premeditated, and consistent fraudulent activity recorded in numerous locations online, XXXX XXXX shoudl be invested further for their actions, and at minimum, should refund me the full amount which was billed to my credit card. I am disappointed that my credit card did not look further into this situation, disregarding my contact to them to take further action. This is all somewhat comical in light of recent news that XXXX  ( the credit card I used ) announced a strong stance against these type of transcaction in their official blog. Please see below : XXXX XXXX XXXX Given the entire content of this submission, I believe the right ethical, moral, and legal action the CFPB can do on my behalf as an honest, hard-working consumer is to honor my request to have XXXX XXXX simply process a full refund of {$68.00} to my credit card. Given that XXXX XXXX has been consistently dodging my requests to process a full refund, and they already made false claims to state, federal, private, and financial institutions, I believe my credit card - along with their responsibility to chargeback fraudulent charges - should reinstate a chargeback and process a refund of {$68.00} to my account. It is the role of Citibank to protect consumers per the cardholder agreement and the Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, and they should advocate on my behalf and complete a refund or credit of {$68.00} to my account.

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 monetary relief