Consumer complaint received 2022-04-03
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not yours

Complaint:
XX/XX/XXXX Consumer Finance Protection Bureau Case # XXXX Request for re-investigation due to inaccurate and/or incomplete findings I am writing to dispute Citis determinations about my complaint in Case # XXXX and to request re-investigation. For reasons I demonstrate, Citis investigation is inaccurate and incomplete such that the conclusion is inaccurate and unjust. The purpose of my complaint is to stop Citi from pursuing me for a debt that I am not responsible for. I also wish to stop the aggressive credit-damaging tactics Citi is using to force me to pay a debt that I am not responsible for. 
DISPUTE SUMMARY I directed Citi to permanently close my account on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX and again on XX/XX/XXXX All legitimate debts were paid in full before I terminated my relationship with Citi . All disputed transactions are unauthorized. All were reported by Citi to me and by me to Citi as fraudulent. Nearly all disputed transactions were incurred after Citi was directed to close the account. Instead of following legitimate instructions, Citi acted on its own accord and opened a new account and failed to protect it. Citi opened an unauthorized account and allowed fraud to accumulate inside it. Citi came up with a new classification, denying the existence of fraud. Nonetheless, a finding of fraud is not needed to support my case. 

Now Citi is using intimidation, devastating my previously perfect credit score, to force me to pay a debt that is clearly not my responsibility. I acted 100 % within my rights as a customer receiving unacceptably lousy service when I instructed Citi to permanently close my account. Citis failure to close the account is 100 % Citis doing, not mine. Leaving the gate wide open to continued fraud is Citis doing, not mine.

Citi was demonstrably unable to provide me with trouble-free credit card services and unable protect me from known and repeated fraud. This, plus the fact that I made over 20 attempts to update my contact info with them, and was unable to get any help led me to direct Citi to permanently close my account. Frankly, given Citis repeated poor performance, I could see no other option to stop the fraud and end the headaches associated with Citis faux-security program. I paid my bill and I fired them. That should have been the end of the story. Sadly, Citis ignored my clear instructions, then went on to open an unwanted account in my name and leave it open and unprotected from the very same fraud. Citi allowed unauthorized transactions to accumulate on an unauthorized account. Now Citi is coming after me in an unjustified and aggressive manner that devastated my previously perfect credit score and left me begging government agencies for help. 

Citis XX/XX/XXXX investigation is incomplete and inaccurate. As such, it comes to a conclusion that is not supported by facts. In spite of Citis own written communications and security behaviors to the contrary, now, without any basis whatsoever Citi claims the hundreds of unauthorized XXXX  transactions are not fraudulent. Though I disagree, my case does not rest on finding the transactions to be fraudulent. In addition to being fraudulent, the disputed transactions and fees took place on an account that Citi was instructed to permanently close, after the date that the account was to be closed. Citi disobeyed clear instructions, then opened an account in my name and left it wide open to fraud. I am not responsible for unauthorized debt incurred after Citi was instructed to permanently close my account. I am not responsible for fraudulent debt that was reported on multiple occasions, using Citis own security procedures. 

Between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, Citi demonstrated over and over again that they are unable to protect my account from repeated unauthorized robotic transactions by the same offending vendor, XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ). Despite their new position that the claims are not fraudulent, Citi themselves identified XXXX  to me as fraudulent on multiple occasions. Whenever Citi asked me to confirm that the transactions were from an unauthorized & unrecognized vendor, I complied. Citi would then block and cancel my card in an attempt to protect it, but then Citi would allow the same un-authorized transactions to occur again. Hundreds of times. Given the poor level of service, I made a decision to fire Citi. Citi refused to follow my instructions. Yet Citi offers no basis, legal or otherwise, by which they can force an unhappy client to be their customer.

Citi implies that I am responsible for these newly classified transactions, yet Citi has not met their burden of proof. I never authorized any of the hundreds of disputed transactions. Citi offers no proof claiming otherwise. Citis position that I am responsible for the transactions is not supported by any evidence whatsoever.

Citi bases their inaccurate conclusions on a false claim that I requested a security closure that prevented them from closing my account. Citis statement fails on 2 counts.

Citis claim that I somehow asked to be plagued by the headaches associated with another useless round of security theater s untrue and does not hold up to the mildest of scrutiny. The truth, available on Citis recording of the session, is that on XX/XX/XXXX and again on XX/XX/XXXX I directed Citi to permanently close my account and begged Citi *not* to send a new card or to engage me in yet another useless round of security theater that had shown itself completely ineffective at achieving account security. Recordings amply demonstrate that my version of events is accurate and that Citis attempt to blame me is false and untrue. 

The recording also captures what I interpreted as a threat by the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. There is plausible deniability around her words so my observation might not hold up in court. Yet the unjustified attack Citi has launched against me is remarkably similar to what she threatened. 

My instructions were clear and unambiguous. Even a biased investigator would find it hard to conclude that I asked for the account to remain open when I so clearly intended to close it. Given the nonsensical conclusion and the possibly threatening behavior of the XX/XX/XXXX customer service rep, it is natural to wonder if perhaps the investigator was misled or dissuaded from reviewing the available documentation that shows my version to be accurate. Regardless of how the erroneous conclusion was reached, contemporaneous notes and recordings from XX/XX/XXXX support my version of events, while also demonstrating that Citis version is inaccurate. Citis reliance on this false statement is deeply troubling. It raises questions about whether other aspects of Citis investigation can be trusted.

Second, Citi claims they could not close my account because a security process was underway. Citis claim that their hands were tied is false in that it ignores the fact that computer over-ride procedures surely exist. More to the point, even if Citis CSR took an action that prevented my account from being closed at the time of my request, Citi fails to explain why they did not close the account later, once the unwanted security process was complete. Citi offers a poor excuse, yet not a single legitimate explanation as to why they ignored my instructions to close the account or for why Citi then went on to directly disobey my instructions and open an unwanted account in my name, only to leave it wide open to continued fraud.

Nothing but Citi stopped Citi from permanently closing my account in a timely manner. I am not responsible for Citis refusal and/or failure to follow my instructions. I am responsible to pay my debts, which I did. I am not responsible for Citis challenges following clear instructions providing customer service and / or security. There is no basis for Citi to force me to be a customer against my will. Citi operated in an unauthorized manner when they opened an account in my name. 

Citi acted on their own accord and disobeyed my clear, direct and legitimate instructions. Without my authorization, Citi opened an unwanted account in my name. They mailed an unwanted card to an address Ive reported to them, upwards of XXXX as both wrong and unsafe. Then, after creating this security risk, and without waiting to verify my identity using their activation process that is supposed to protect me, Citi allowed new fraudulent charges to accumulate on the account. The unwanted card was never activated. Ive never seen it. I do not know the account number. I am prohibited from discussing it with Citi. Now Citi wants to blame me for their outrageous offenses against basic customer security. All charges on the account are, by definition, unauthorized. I am not responsible for them. 

I never received or activated the latest card nor have I ever had access to the account or even to Citi CSRs to discuss the account. As noted above, without the account number, Citis security protocol prevents me from speaking to them about the account. My position is that I am not responsible for any charges, fraudulent or legitimate, that were incurred AFTER I directed Citi to permanently close the account. I am not responsible for charges to an un-activated account. Any such charges are, by definition, unauthorized and not subject to collection. 

Citis own actions and inactions created this unwanted account. Then Citis ineffective security procedures opened the door to additional fraud. Now Citi is intimidating me in an unjustified attempt to collect approximately {$300.00} in transactions that would not even exist had it not been for Citis own actions and inactions in this case. The devastation created by Citi is unjustified and is out-of-proportion to the size of the debt. 

I have never knowingly done business with XXXX, never authorized any transactions with XXXX. I have no pattern of purchasing similar products or in similar patterns. Screenshots from XXXX XXXX confirm that I never ordered from them in the past and never placed *any* card on file with them, let lone the current one. Citi offers no evidence that I ever authorized any of the hundreds of fraudulent, unauthorized, robotic XXXX  transactions. Citi has not met their burden of proof.

In spite of Citis new and surprising claim that the disputed transactions are not fraudulent, there are ongoing television news stories showing that XXXX  is associated with a credit card scam similar to the scam XXXX transactions Citi keeps allowing on my account. Citi offers no explanation or support for their new classification. This, along with Citis own previous statements, notifications and behaviors that all treated XXXX  as fraudulent, raises questions about the basis for Citis new classification, its accuracy or where it came from. It is unclear if Citi hopes to apply their new classification to the billions of unauthorized XXXX  transactions among their other clients, or if this new classification was developed solely as an investigation tactic related to my account. Regardless of whether Citi is applying this new unsupported classification fairly, across the board or solely to me, my case does not rest solely on a finding of fraud. Disputed debt consists solely of transactions that Citi previously identified to me, and I then confirmed as fraudulent plus fees that Citi charged me after I twice directed Citi to permanently close the account. My position is that I am not responsible for any of these charges.

Citi makes false claims, yet fails to demonstrate the inaccuracy of any of my claims. Citi has not shown any proof that I ever authorized the disputed transactions. No such proof exists. I am innocent in this matter. Citis investigation is inaccurate and incomplete and comes to a false and unjustified conclusion. Citis
devastation of my credit score is intimidating, damaging and unjustified. 

Nearly all of the disputed transactions took place in the XXXX period AFTER XX/XX/XXXX, when I first directed Citi to permanently close my account. Citi claims that I somehow asked to be plagued by the headaches associated with another useless round of security theater. The allegation is both untrue and does not hold up to the mildest of scrutiny. The truth, available on Citis recording of the sessions, is that on XX/XX/XXXX and again on XX/XX/XXXX I directed Citi to permanently close my account and begged Citi *not* to send a new card or to engage me in yet another useless round of security theater that had shown itself completely ineffective at achieving account security. 

My first position is that I am not responsible for unauthorized charges that both Citi and I had previously identified and reported as fraudulent on multiple occasions. My second position is that any charges accepted AFTER Citi was instructed to permanently close my account are unauthorized and not subject to collection. My second position does not rest on a finding of fraud. 

The only thing stopping Citi from permanently closing my account was Citi. Citis claim that a computer can not be interrupted implies that there is no such thing as a manual over-ride in a computer system. This is difficult to find truthful. Additionally, IF it was true that the process could not be interrupted, then Citi also fails to explain why they did not close my account once the unwanted process that Citi initiated was complete. Citis excuses do not explain why they did not implement my instructions once the process that they had instigated against my wishes was complete. In the absence of a legitimate basis for refusing to close my account, Citi was obligated to close the account. No such basis has ever been stated, either at the time my instructions were given or now, in Citis XX/XX/XXXX letter. 

Citis misguided pursuit of this debt is aggressive. Even if I was guilty, which I am not, Citis punishment far outweighs the alleged crime ( I stand accused of failing to pay < {$300.00} in fraudulent and/or unauthorized debt ). Citis damaging lies related to this tiny debt hare harming me. They already caused my previously perfect credit score to fall from 800 to less than 400 in matter of two months.

Citis actions are wrong and they harm me. I am being treated as though I am guilty of something of which I am innocent and of which no proof has ever been offered against me.

Citis unjustified actions impact my ability to find employment, to rent a home, to buy insurance, to obtain credit, to go to a hospital during a pandemic. I am a retired woman on a fixed income. If someone like me, white, educated and with a certain amount of savings to mitigate the impact of Citis intimidation, at least for a while, and a perfect credit score based upon decades of data about my credit behavior, can not get Citi to stop this intimidation against me, I fear what happens to people who are more desperate and who may be easier to take advantage of.

*Had Citi protected my account, rather than leaving it wide open to repeated fraud, I would not have felt that permanently closing the account was my only option.

*Had Citi closed the account as directed, then none of these new charges would exist. 

*The ONLY reason any charges exist on my account is because Citi disregarded my instructions, issued me an unwanted new card, began accepting charges on the new card even though I never activated the card, then left my account wide open for continued fraud.

For these reasons, my position is that I do not owe this debt, that Citi should have protected me from these continued attacks. Since Citi could or would not protect my account, they are now obligated to reverse the charges.

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 monetary relief