Consumer complaint received 2017-09-20
Company: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: RI
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems
Sub-issue: Other problem

Complaint:
Let me start this out by saying this is my third CFPB complaint for this matter. XXXX XXXX has been unfair and deceptive in their handling of this claim and this is a classic example of a UDAAP violation. I have been passed around to various groups, lied to, mis quoted policies in person and in writing etc etc etc. XXXX  has done everything in their power to try and make this go away when they are indeed in the wrong. To date I have not got a valid answer on my claim. See below for first two claims. Prior to every conversation I have had with XXXX XXXX I have been told that the call was being recorded, so along with the attached there are recordings of the misleading conversations. 

The latest response to me states that the new policy does n't apply to me because of when I made the purchase. I was provided the old policy, a useless bank statement with nothing pertaining to this matter other than it saying the policy had changed on XX/XX/XXXX and another insulting explanation for why my claim is not covered. When I spoke to the XXXX   representative I specifically asked on a recorded phone call for evidence where I was told that " Purchases made prior to XX/XX/XXXX were subject to the old policy ''. I was actually told in the first conversation after the 2nd CFPB complaint on XX/XX/XXXX that I filed my claim under " XXXX XXXX '' and the policy only covers " XXXX XXXX '' ... I was told the policy specifically says " XXXX XXXX '', which is why I was not covered. I scoffed at this and corrected the representative that in my initial claim i cited the policy correctly, and stated that the reason my trip was intrerrupted was do to a XXXX XXXX ( which is the same as XXXX XXXX ) and that at the time the trip was supposed to happen the XXXX XXXX level at the trip destination was at its highest level. Another example of a deceptive act trying to get me to back off of my claim rather than go forward with the correct amount of due dilligence on behalf of the consumer. I was then told on XX/XX/XXXX that through further research my purchase applied to an older policy that was replaced after the purchase but before the claim was filed. 

No where in the new policy or old policy or notification I received from XXXX  in my XX/XX/XXXX statement does it say " Purchases made prior to X date fall under the old policy ''. In fact it actually says on page 38 under Legal Disclosures " Effective XX/XX/XXXX this guide to benefits REPLACES all prior disclosures, program descriptions, advertising, and brochures by any party. The Policyholder and the insurer reserve the right to change benefits and features of this program anytime. Notice will be provided of any changes '' and also on page 26 the new policy says under terms of coverage for trip cancellation or inturruption " Coverage begins on the date the trip was purchased and ENDS ON THE TRIP DEPARTURE DATE ''. My trip was purchased under one policy and ended under the new policy, which according to the language in the new policy I SHOULD BE COVERED. As the consumer I should not be faulted for a change in policy holder by the Credit Card company. According to the NEW policy my trip should be covered as it falls within the coverage timeframe. 

This is a potential UDAAP concern and I would like to receive local representation from the CFPB. Despite what I am being told about Purchases made prior to XX/XX/XXXX the policy is misleading and deceptive to the consumer. The CFPB Consumer Laws and Regulations manual V.2 published in XX/XX/XXXX states for Under, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) on page 5 under Deceptive Acts or Practices that " Written disclosures may be insufficient to correct a misleading statement or representation, particularly where the consumer is directed away from qualifying limitations in the text or is counseled that reading the disclosures is unnecessary. Likewise, oral or fine print disclosures or contract disclosures may be insufficient to cure a misleading headline or a prominent written representation. Similarly, a deceptive act or practice may not be cured by subsequent truthful disclosures. '' The policy goes on to state " Acts or practices that may be deceptive include : making misleading cost or price claims ; offering to provide a product or service that is not in fact available ; using bait-and-switch techniques ; omitting material limitations or conditions from an offer ; or failing to provide the promised services. '' The amount of money I spend each year on my XXXX XXXX compared to the {$1000.00} claim shows how absurd this has become. It costs me nothing to read this policy and poke holes in its language. XXXX XXXX would rather try to make me go away with lies and deception than make this right. I understand my rights as a consumer but others may not and this is a clear cut example of deception and misleading statements. Whether I am right or wrong with this claim the inabilty to obtain a sufficient answer is why I am filing another claim. 

" Let me start this out by saying this is a repeat complaint. Please see the below in " " for the original complaint which still holds true. " I made a purchase for plane tickets in XX/XX/XXXX. The trip needed to be changed due to XXXX XXXX, which is a covered reason under the terms and conditions of my credit card. XXXX referred me to XXXX XXXX XXXX. When speaking to XXXX XXXX they told me that prior to XX/XX/XXXX they did not handle claims against this card, so they referred me to XXXX : A XXXX XXXX. I submitted all necessary documents to XXXX who then denied the claim based on the reason that " XXXX XXXX is not covered ''. I called them and sent them screenshots from the XXXX XXXX website showing them that indeed XXXX XXXX is listed as a covered reason. The case was reopened, and after weeks of back and forth communication, XXXX sent me back to XXXX as they said i needed to put the claim through them. When speaking to XXXX again, i was told that another company needed to be involved but they couldint not get me in touch with them, I had to go back to XXXX. I have not contacted XXXX again but will be and will also be closing my account with XXXX. The runaround i am receiving is terrible business and deserves to be escalated to all levels. I have all of the necessary documentation detailing the above, including written correspondence with XXXX, screenshots from the XXXX website, all necessary receipts etc. I can provide if necessary. '' This past week my complaint was denied by XXXX XXXX   citing the policy saying that XXXX XXXX was not a covered reason for trip insurance. They even attached the policy and left me a voicemail telling me to read over my benefits ... which i did before all of this started leading me to file a valid insurance claim. On page 26 of the cardholder benefits policy and on the benefits section on the cards website it says under covered reasons " XXXX XXXX ''. Please see the attached letter where the policy was incorrectly referenced. At this point i have been passed between multiple insurance agencies, because when i made the purchase they were using one insurance company and when i filed the complaint they were using another. The original claim was indeed denied until i cited the policy and then was told it was a valid claim. I have an entire email chain with the original insurance company stating this and also telling me to go back to XXXX. The person i worked with from the Office of the President was unattentive to my claim and the original CFPB complaint. She would take days or weeks to respond to me after leaving me voicemails in inopportune times throughout the work day. She even put me back in touch with XXXX who I was able to determine before filing the CFPB complaint ( without the help of XXXX XXXX ) was not the correct company to talk to ... and they again told me it was not them who can help me ... which I already knew and told had already told XXXX XXXX   office of the president when we spoke on the phone. When i tried calling XXXX XXXX again, I left a voicemail and received no response ... just a denial letter and voicemail telling me to check my email. The Denial on the CFPB website with attachments from the office of the president incorrectly cites their own policy, attaches the policy for me to ( re read ) and neglects the fact that " XXXX XXXX '' is listed on page 26 of their policy ( all attached ). All of this was given to the woman working my claim, along with all the other evidence needed including email chain with the original insurance company, all receipts, screenshots from their website etc etc etc ... and clearly ignored. See attached. This is unacceptable business and it is unacceptable that because this company can not figure out the correct insurance agency to put me in touch with or handle for me as a valued customer, I am now out the money that should be paid back to me. At the very least they should have competent people working in customer facing positions who can ACCURATELY AND ADEQUATELY CITE their cardholder benefits policy. If the consumer can read it, the Office of the President for XXXX XXXX should be able to read the policy before falsely denying a claim. At this point the only person that has done their due diligence in this situation is me. ''

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