Consumer complaint received 2016-09-16
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA
Product: Credit card
Issue: Credit determination

Complaint:
This is to dispute Citibank 's response to my complaint case number : XXXX filed with the CPFB, as I find my issue was not addressed by the company and further action is needed from Citibank to at least properly address my concerns. Let me explain myself. 

In my original complaint, I disputed Citibank 's reason for denying my application : Length of time accounts have been established on your credit report based on my Equifax Credit Report. 

I stressed I hold a XXXX credit history on my Equifax credit report and I have several credit cards opened with Citibank, the oldest of which is over XXXX years old. I also mentioned a Citibank 's Credit Agent advised me on the phone Citibank looks at over 5 years personal credit history to approve sole propietors for a business credit card. 
Citibank 's response made no reference to those claims which where the core of my dispute/complaint. 

In order to properly address my issue, I request Citibank to specifically respond to the following points, XXXX by XXXX, based on my Equifax Credit Report attached herewith : 1 ) Do you consider 4 years and 2 months of time of accounts established on my credit report short enough to deny my application for a business credit card? Please explain. 
2 ) If so, what is the minimum length of time of accounts established Citibank is looking at to approve a business credit card application? 
3 ) Is the 5 years minimum length of time of accounts established advised to me by a Citibank 's credit agent on accurate? 
4 ) Why does not Citibank disclose this hard policy on the landing application page for the product? 

Until Citibank 's response does not address XXXX by XXXX the XXXX points specified above, I will consider my dispute/complaint has not been properly addressed.. 

I need Citibank 's further clarification as 4 years and 2 months does not intuitively seem to be a short credit history to base a denial for my application. 

If Citibank is considering 4 years and 2 months as not a long enough credit history and/or is looking at over 5 years of time of account established to approve a business credit card application, then Citibank should disclose this on their landing application page to avoid misleading and luring applicants into applying for a product for which they are automatically disqualified due to Citibank 's minimum time of account establishment hard policy. The key point here is that 5 years of time of account establishment as a minimum requirement to approve an application is not intuitive and thus needs to be disclosed for transparency purposes. 

If only I had known about this before submitting my application, I would not have submitted it and wasted a hard pull of my credit report. Based on the above, if Citibank keeps denying my application, I request to have my hard inquiry from my XXXX credit report removed as I find I was misled by Citibank 's omission to disclose this requirement on the application page of the product, for instance by stating " applicants with less than 5 years of account establishment will not be considered for this product ''. 

In order to properly address my issue, I expect Citibank 's response to explicitly address the following : - the XXXX points highlited above, XXXX by XXXX - my request to be approved if 4 years and 2 months of credit history are considered long enough to approve my application - if still declined, an explanation as to why 4 years and 2 months of credit history are considered long enough for a personal credit card application and not for a business credit card by Citibank - if still declined, my request to have the hard pull from my XXXX credit report removed due to the lack of transparency of Citibank in disclosing such a hard and counterintuitive policy on the application page for the product

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