Consumer complaint received 2019-10-27
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL
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: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement

Complaint:
On XX/XX/2019, I was victimized by a tech support scammer who claimed to be associated with XXXX and was charged {$1500.00}. I realized almost right away what had happened, and followed the instructions of the FTC ( Federal Trade Commission ) Consumer Information website How to Spot, Avoid, and Report Tech Support Scams, which states If you paid a tech support scammer with a credit or debit card, you may be able to stop the transaction. Contact your credit card company or bank right away. Tell them what happened and ask if they can reverse the charges. I followed these instructions, called Citicards, explained what happened, and asked them to not put the charges through. They agreed, and recommended that I cancel my card and get a new number, and I did so. However, the charges appeared on my next credit card bill. The charges were posted on XX/XX/XXXX ; that was 9 days after the transaction and after I called to inform the company. I called on XX/XX/XXXX ( speaking with XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ), XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX and XXXX ), and XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX and XXXX ), and each time, I was bounced back and forth between the fraud/security department and billing disputes. Each time, I was told that since I gave out my number, it was not considered to be fraud and it would have to be a billing dispute on the basis that I did not receive the service for which I paid. And each time, I was told that a billing dispute would be opened and I would be contacted in 7 to 10 days. I was also told that I would not have to pay the disputed charge and I would not be charged interest. I never was contacted after the calls and the charges continued to appear with interest. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called for the fourth time and was told by XXXX, the supervisor in the billing disputes department, that the fraud department judged that since I gave out the number, it was a legitimate charge and I was responsible for it, and a billing dispute could not be opened because it was already adjudicated. But the reason it initially went to the fraud department was not my faultit was because the agent on the initial phone call referred it to that department. Not to mention that I had informed Citicards on the day of the transaction, asking that the charge not be posted, following instructions on the FTC website -- and that was nine days before the charge was actually posted. It makes no sense that if it was determined that the disputed charges need to go to billing disputes instead, an investigation there can no longer be opened ( And in fact, I was told three times that such an investigation would be opened, although it never was ).  The entire explanation makes no sense to me, but I was worn down after spending so many hours with no end in sight. I was also being charged interest on the fraudulent charges, so I authorized the amount to be paid and closed my Citicard account. My wife, who also had a card under her own name, closed her account at the same time.

I did, however, want to file a complaint about this incident, and so I looked on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau website and saw other complaints that were very similar to mine in which Citicards promised to open an investigation multiple times and failed to do so, compelling the consumer to pay the fraudulent charge. One of these was a case in which the consumer did not give out his number and even so, he continued to be charged. I do not understand how Citicards is being allowed to continue to treat their clients in this unethical manner, in effect enabling agents of fraud to criminally profit at the expense of their clients.

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