Consumer complaint received 2023-08-13
Company: Atlanticus Services Corporation
State: CA
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: Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card

Complaint:
On or about XX/XX/XXXX I noticed a charge on my Fortiva statement on XX/XX/XXXX for TXXXXXXXX XXXX CA {$150.00} that I did not make or authorize ( attached ). This prompted an immediate investigation on my part which caused me to discover that my Fortiva credit card and drivers license had been stolen out of my car a couple of days before the charge was made, when my vehicle was in the care and custody of the valet service at a local mall. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I notified Fortiva of same, and thereafter, in quadruplicate : 1. By calling the lost / stolen number on their website and leaving a voice mail ( they didnt even have their lost / stolen hotline staffed by someone to answer ), 2. By secure message on their website under my account log in - and then again, after hearing nothing back from them, on XX/XX/XXXX 3. By email, 4. By written mail sent via USPS ( attached ). 

On XX/XX/XXXX they responded by email ( attached ) stating that they had sent me an affidavit by mail on XX/XX/XXXX to fill out, and indicating I could email a digital copy of it back to them. Why they delayed action on the claim by sending the affidavit by snail mail instead of just attaching it to this email or just originally emailing it to my address on file, or via secure message under my account log in on their website, is beyond me. From the start, it seemed like they intended no effort be put into this. 

The affidavit arrived in the mail on XX/XX/XXXX. I filled it out completely and emailed a digital copy of it back to them that same day ( attached ). 

The charge in question was credited back to my account on the following statement ( attached ), but then re-applied to the statement following that ( attached ). 

On or about the last week of XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter in the mail from Fortiva dated XX/XX/XXXX ( attached ) stating Correspondence obtained from merchants in question indicates that you have provided them with the authorization to charge your account for the amount you are now disputing. We suggest you contact them for further information regarding these transactions. 

The letter was on stationery with Fortiva Credit Card printed in full color at the top, but with no contact address, no phone number, and appeal process included anywhere in the communication whatsoever. 

Attached to the letter was ONE page, in the upper right hand corner of which stated page 2 of 13. On this page, which one presumes is the information the merchant provided to Fortiva, was my name, my account number, the cards CVC code, my billing address and details of the merchandise being a prescription veterinary drug. 

As indicated by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX, and by Cal. Code Regs. tit. 16 1780.1 ( attached ), both state and federal laws require the seller of any prescription veterinary drugs in California to maintain prescriber information including prescriber license number. 

Not only was Fortiva XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to conduct an investigation, or to fully disclose their documentation to me, what little they did manage to scrape up and embarrass themselves with by claiming as proof that I authorized the charge, and all of it, was information that is printed on the drivers license and credit card that was stolen from me. 

Fortiva XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX provided no proof of shipment, no proof of delivery, no evidence whatsoever or even reference to same that I made or authorized this charge. 

Additionally, they completely ignored a definitive, independent audit trail attached to the goods that were purchased and available to them, simply by asking the merchant for the veterinarian license number which the merchant is legally required to maintain record of, and which can be traced to a name and address and phone number in a matter of seconds by entering it into California governmental websites available to the public. It wouldnt have come back to me - Im not a veterinarian and have no association to the profession. Nor would any vet. that a valid license number trace to be able to identify me as the prescription issue-ee - Ive not been to a veterinarian because I do not own or have responsibility for the care of any animals, nor have I, for decades. 

EVEN WORSE STILL, the information Fortiva XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX revealed that the merchant provided them, had an I.P. address for the order that was physically located more than 50 miles away from me, and an email address for the order that is not mine. 

While falsely claiming to have evidence that I authorized the charge, either through willful disregard for the law, or blinding incompetence, Fortiva XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ignored evidence they tripped right over in their own, pathetic excuse of an investigation, that corroborates the charge as fraudulent and NOT authorized by me.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief