Consumer complaint received 2019-01-22
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CA
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: Store credit card
Issue: Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers
Sub-issue: Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card

Complaint:
I am disputing both charge on my CareCredit card rmade at XXXX for a disputed amount of {$2200.00}. CareCredit offers their card through a specific network of providers, one of which ( XXXX ) has conducted false and misleading advertising causing me to do engage in a transaction that I would have otherwise not done so. Therefore, their association of third party account has damaged me financially.

The provider has NOT offered a fully refund to resolve this dispute.

The charges in question are 2 XXXX ( XX/XX/2018 ) and 2 XXXX  (XX/XX/2018 ) for {$750.00} each plus a 25 % discount. = total amount paid is {$2200.00}.

I sought for XXXX  treatment for my XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX  at XXXX. XXXX   advertises XXXX  as guaranteed XXXX XXXX.

On their website on the day of the treatment, the website specifically said : With Each XXXX  session comes a 20 % reduction in XXXX XXXX. And all this happens in less than 60 minutes. Amazing, right?

Since they have realized this was false advertising and they have since removed that statistic. THIS ADMITS THEY KNEW THEY WERE FALSE ADVERTISING and I have been financially damaged as a result.

Note, there is no * to show any possible additional disclosures of this 20 % claim on their website. This claim is what is exactly listed on the site and was repeated several times during my consult and also during both sessions. It is the expectation of the service that I entered into a contract for.

Even though treatment was rendered, I did not experience 20 % reduction in XXXX in any of those areas. In fact, there was no result at all. No change. XXXX has photos on file that they can provide that support this as well. A third party, who would look at pictures would say the same thing.

XXXX said that additional XXXX would not work on me and therefore did not offer additional XXXX  to remedy the problem. In the email attached, they wrote It is also recommended by our medical team to not retreat the area as they feel it may not render a beneficial outcome. They offered a store credit for their other services instead. However, I do not need, nor want, their other services, like XXXX  or XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX. Those other services should not be forced onto me ethically.

As explained to them, store credit is not an acceptable solution. Only a full refund back on my CareCredit card is the only acceptable solution to me. To hold my money ransom in exchange for a store credit, for services, I do not need, nor did I sign up for, is not acceptable. I went in for a particular purpose, with a guaranteed advertised result and they are offering me store credit for other services. No reasonable person would deem this ethically acceptable or responsible.

WHAT THEY PUT ON THEIR WEBSITE IS FALSE ADVERTISING. They are taking advantage of customers in unfair, deceptive and abusive ways. This is a UDAAP violation and has caused me significant financial injury and distress. In addition, this is not an ethical way for XXXX to conduct business.

Even though it is their company policy to not refund, I only signed the contract due to their advertising and expected result on their website. I would not have entered into a contract otherwise.

It is not an ethical business practice for a company to 1 ) falsely advertise a guaranteed result 2 ) admit that result was not 20 % 3 ) admit that re-treating would have no impact AND 4 ) bait and switch to hold onto a customers money, for a store credit they dont need for other services of no interest or need.

It is unfair, unjust and unethical.

I hope that CareCredit can see this abuse and instead choose to be an advocate and champion of the customer, to protect them from this sort of false advertising and abuse.

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