Consumer complaint received 2023-10-10
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: DC
Product: Credit card
Sub-product: General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Trouble using your card
Sub-issue: Can't use card to make purchases

Complaint:
On or around the early hours of Saturday, XX/XX/2023, I lost my wallet on the way home from meeting a friend for dinner. Upon the realization I no longer had access to my wallet, which contained my ID as well as XXXX personal credit cards and a XXXX bank debit card, I immediately began to mitigate any potential concerns over someone else having unauthorized access to those cards by calling the issuers for each of those companies to report that the physical card was lost. One such company I reached out to was GM Card by Marcus, a Goldman Sachs company. 

The agent on the phone was courteous and empathetic to my situation and took the necessary steps to close out my physical card and send out a new card. However, within that same call, I asked about whether the virtual card on my account would be updated and viable to use while prior to waiting for my replacement card to arrive via snail mail. The agent answered in the affirmative that I would be able to utilize the virtual card immediately. In fact, I even verified that the numbers on the virtual card had updated, so presumably the new virtual account was established prior to me trying to use it. With the assistance of the agent, the virtual card was added to my XXXX XXXX, and I proceeded to try to use it at a merchant approximately XXXX minutes later. That charge was declined twice. The amount was for approximately {$38.00} and at the time of the charge, I had over {$2700.00} in funds available on my credit line.

Given that I checked the available line of credit and was assured by the GM Card agent that the virtual card would work, I called them back to understand what the problem was. This started a series of confusing conversations with multiple agents. Each time I called and spoke with a GM Card agent, they instructed they would need to do a One-Time Pin ( OTP ) authorization where they would validate that the virtual card was being utilized by the authorized user. Each time, I provided the OTP code I received via text message, ( which was only accessible from my own facial biometrics on my XXXX ), and provided that OTP code to the agent on the phone ; and each time I provided that code, I was instructed to wait approximately XXXX minutes and the card should be available for use. 

The scenario above happened multiple times through out the weekend. At times, the card would work and at other times it would not work. There was really no rhyme or reason because often times, I only used the card with the same merchant ( e.g., XXXX ). At no point, was I aware that there was an account restriction until I had to follow-up with the issuer on Sunday, XX/XX/2023. By this time, I had spoken to multiple agents in a XXXX period of time. No one could answer or even eluded to the account being restricted. In total, we did the XXXX verification four separate times. It was only when I demanded to speak to a supervisor to dig into this issue further, the agent indicated that the account was restricted and had to be reviewed by " upper-level management. '' I told the agents that the account being " under review, '' when it was the only card I had available to pay for groceries/local travel/etc. was super generic and not helpful. That the process of having to validate my authenticity four times was not only unfair, but highly-deceptive as I reasonably relied upon GM 's explicit representations that this verification process would resolve the issue. The issue was not resolved and as of XXXX XXXX on Tuesday, XX/XX/2023. I still do not have access to the available credit line, nor have I received a follow-up call from a representative of " upper-level management '' who could advise me why the account is under review/restricted.

To be fair, this card is not normally used by me. I am a a risk-compliance professional myself and I understand the need to have controls in place to verify that the inconsistent usage pattern on a credit card is by the authorized user and not a fraudulent party. However, what is the purpose of having an OTP validation process, if the issuer is still going to restrict the authorized user from utilizing their funds? This was a question I asked to representatives, but of course they were not able to veer of script to answer that question. As a matter of fact, the GM Card agent I spoke to on Monday, XX/XX/2023, agreed with me that it did not make sense to her either. 

So within the past XXXX or XXXX days, I have had several phone calls with GM Card agents, validated my identity via the OTP process on four separate occasions, have attempted to resolve this issue through my own personal knowledge and experience as a risk-compliance professional, and have unsuccessfully been able to resolve this issue with the card issuer.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief