Consumer complaint received 2018-10-30
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: Overcharged for something you did purchase with the card

Complaint:
Complaint against : Citibank N.A. 
XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, SD XXXX XXXX Date of Charge : XX/XX/XXXX Amount : {$1500.00} of {$1600.00} Here are the facts : I was significantly overcharged by a local Taxi Driver ( the Merchant ) on a short trip from my home in suburban XXXX to XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. The agreed charge was {$60.00} ( the distance was 18 miles - typical Taxi or XXXX fare ~ {$40.00} ), but the taxi driver used my corporate card issued by Citibank on the small XXXX card reader, charged {$1600.00} with forged signature absolutely without my knowledge or consent, and refused to produce a sales slip, citing machine failure but promising to text a receipt, which he never did. After my texts and voicemail of many rounds, the Taxi Driver left a voicemail on my cell phone on XX/XX/XXXX, explicitly admitting the overcharge and promising to refund, but he never did it, either. 


I started disputing the charge after it came to my knowledge on XX/XX/XXXX. Here are the facts that demonstrates Citibanks failure to properly handle and resolve the dispute and protect its customer. 
1 ). After this {$1500.00} overcharge came to my knowledge on XX/XX/XXXX, I immediately called Citibank customer service phone number ( referenced above ) for the purpose of filing a dispute. The customer service representative on the phone failed/refused to file a dispute on my behalf, insisting that I provide a sale slip at first, even after I explained clearly that the Taxi Driver refused to provide a sales slip. According to the Fair Credit Billing Act of XXXX, the burden of proof is on the Merchant ( the Taxi Driver ). The insistence that a victimized customer provides the sales slip, which should and could be obtained from the Merchant, before starting a dispute, was erroneous, misleading, and unreasonable.

2 ). A dispute was successfully filed later on XX/XX/XXXX when I called Citibank again, with the help of another customer service representative. Citibank issued a chargeback of {$1500.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, Citibank mailed two requests respectively, for signed statement and supporting documentations. Both requests were promptly responded and addressed by me, through Fax to Citibank. In particular, I stated the facts that the signature was forged and I possess a voicemail from the Taxi Driver who explicitly admitted the overcharge. 
3 ). After XX/XX/XXXX, there was no further request from Citibank. While I assumed that the dispute has been successfully resolved and called on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX to confirm the closure of the dispute. The customer service representative on XX/XX/XXXX was not able to see any status. The customer service representative on the call on XX/XX/XXXX assured me that the dispute has been resolved in my favor and I should not worry about anything, and I requested a statement by mail. However, to my shock, after five months of no status update, on XX/XX/XXXX, Citibank closed the dispute in favor of the Taxi Driver and rebilled the {$1500.00} on my corporate card, disregarding overwhelming and unequivocal evidence including the apparently forged signature and the voicemail from the Taxi Driver. 
4 ). On the latter from Citibank dated XX/XX/XXXX requesting signed detailed letter and supporting documentation, it states We must receive this information within ten ( 10 ) calendar days of the date of this letter. The letter from South Dakota was not delivered until XX/XX/XXXX - it may take another 5 days to mail back. Even though I responded immediately by fax, such a short period as ten calendar days can barely cover the days needed to mail both ways and poses an unreasonable burden and risks to Citibanks customers.

5 ). On a related side note, I specifically subscribed email and SMS alerts on high value transaction amount, configured on Citibank Commercial card website. However, when the card was replaced due to fraud concern, the alerts were turned off. I re-configured the alerts but as I can see online today, this high value transaction alert is again turned off.

It has been more than seven months since the {$1500.00} outrageous overcharge occurred and my dispute was filed. This has been the only credit card charge dispute I have ever had so far, but the process and result that Citibank handles this dispute were extremely frustrating and disappointing, and simply wrong. It demonstrates the significant lack of protection and care to its credit card customers. I reserve my right to take any necessary actions including legal actions, and will certainly escalate this dispute to the senior management of Citibank and my company that has thousands of employees and tens of million dollars of transactions every year through the corporate card relationship with Citibank.

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