Consumer complaint received 2020-04-12
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: AL
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/XXXX, I phoned Bank of America Credit Card Claims to notify the Bank of a potential dispute involving charges assessed during the previous XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX by a landlord that charges " accelerated rent '' and had been endeavoring throughout my three-and-half years as a tenant -- as such landlords are wont to do -- to manufacture a pretext for either evicting me or forcing to vacate prematurely in order to maximize the illicit profits to be derived from Clause # 27 of the Lease Agreement that allows the landlord to collect the full rent due under the remainder of the original lease term if a tenant breaks the lease without the landlord 's permission for any reason, without any obligation to re-let the apartment after the tenant vacates. I was told by the Bank at the time that the credit card payments I had made pending the landlord 's response to my request from XX/XX/XXXX to terminate the lease by mutual consent over the landlord 's most recent efforts to defraud me by forcing me to vacate prematurely through willful negligence -- by steadfastly refusing to address a toxic mold infestation in my apartment that I had initially reported to the landlord on XX/XX/XXXX, even after complaining to Municipal Code Compliance on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX -- were not too old to dispute and that the Bank " had my back '' in the likely event that I was not able to come to terms with the landlord. Nonetheless, when I followed up with the Bank on XX/XX/XXXX to formalize my disputes upon being forced to vacate on XX/XX/XXXX after the landlord falsely alleged on XX/XX/XXXX that I was a holdover tenant without assessing the double-the-rent penalty provided for under Clause # 12 of the Lease Agreement in the event of holdover tenancy and demanded that I vacate my apartment within ten days ( my initial lease term had expired at the end of the previous year, at which point I became a month-to-month tenant while addressing fallout from the sudden demise of my mother on XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX XXXX ), I wound up ultimately being informed on XX/XX/XXXX by the Bank that the charges were indeed too old to dispute ( after being previously informed on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX that my disputes had been closed because of failure to provide documentation, while also being incongruously notified the previous day that I would need to submit supporting documentation by XX/XX/XXXX ) and that since the charges did not involve fraud, the bank could not uphold my disputed charges and that they would therefore not be forwarded back to the merchant to seek clarification regarding why they were legitimate in the face of the new ( as of XX/XX/XXXX ) Georgia Code 44-7-24 that allows landlords who engage in retaliatory conduct to be penalized as much as {$500.00} and one month 's rent ( or {$580.00}, in my case ) for each separate incident of retaliation in response to tenants reporting a landlord 's negligence to local or federal authorities.

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