Complaint sub-issue: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement

I have contacted Citi 's department for credit card disputes around a half-dozen times now, and I'm hoping that the CFPB might have an alternate contact that would be more effective. 

The documentation below and attached shows all of the following bullets occurred. 
- Citi requested additional information XXXX XXXX ( file 7 ) and XXXX XXXX ( file 10 ), but bafflingly and inexplicably simultaneously closed the dispute each time. 
- Citi 's request dated XXXX XXXX ( file 10 ) requests information previously provided XXXX XXXX, which I've made Citi aware of - Citi confirmed receipt of the email dated XXXX XXXX below and committed to " resolving '' the dispute ( again ). Citi provided confirmation of commitment on XXXX XXXX and again on XXXX XXXX. 
- Citi is beyond the two billing period timeframe to resolve the chargeback. 

From : XXXX XXXX XXXX To : XXXX XXXX Sent : Wednesday, XX/XX/2021, XXXX XXXX EST Subject : Re : Case ID XXXX Good morning, On XXXX XXXX I contacted Citi Disputes and spoke to XXXX. I asked her to re-open the dispute because of the additional information provided in the trailing email. She did, from which Citi 's latest response was likely developed. 

For ease of access, I'm re-attaching all documents to support the claims below. There's four attachments to this email, each attachment is associated with one of the four underlined sections. 

Attachment 1 of 4 - Citi Letter : The attached update dated XXXX XXXX says " If you are able to supply a copy of a '' ... " advertisement '' ... to prove you should have been billed a different amount, we will reopen our investigation. '' Fortunately, an advertisement has already been provided to Citi on XX/XX/XXXX, in the form of my rental reservation For ease of access, I've reattached all pertinent documents, and provided an additional explanation below to be super explicit about what the issue is. ( Including the initial dispute and this email, I've contacted Citi five times total about this, so I feel like we're probably " talking past '' each other about something. ) Attachment 2 of 4 - XXXX XXXX XXXX : It shows reservation number XXXX It shows the ( non-discounted ) weekly rate of {$850.00} It shows the taxes and fees associated with that non-discounted weekly rate of {$130.00} It omits the amount of the XXXX discount amount, although with some arithmetic I think it's pretty simple to conclude the amount is {$240.00} ( see next bullet for how this amount was determined ) It shows the total estimated charge of {$740.00}, from arithmetic, the total estimated charge is the result of XXXX Attachment 3 of 4 - XXXX Receipt : It shows reservation number XXXX It shows the ( partly-discounted ) weekly rate of {$850.00} It shows taxes and fees ( you'll need to sum the " other charges '' ) of {$160.00} It omits the XXXX  discount, but for clarity I'm just going to show a value here of {$0.00} It shows a line item for pre-paid fuel of {$52.00} It shows a " total charge '' of {$1000.00}, from arithmetic, the total charge is the result of XXXX It is clear from the bold values in the two previous sections that the XXXX discount was not applied. To super explicitly address Citi 's latest update letter : the discrepancy is highlighted above between the reservation advertisement and receipt. I am only disputing the highlighted discrepancy. 

At the time of rental, I requested the XXXX agent apply the discount and provided my XXXX card. I had also arrived 20 minutes prior to the reservation rental time, and offered to delay the pickup of the rental until the reservation timeslot. The XXXX agent declined both, and refused to give me a car for my vacation with my family unless I paid the less-discounted non XXXX rate. I accepted because I presumed I could contact their corporate number later to have the issue resolved. 

Attachment 4 of 4- XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX responded ( also attached ) and has no record of the reservation at all, and refused to help me further. 

If you're confused by the two prior paragraphs - you're not alone - this is baffling to me also! 

So, with all of that established, I'm disputing the amount of {$240.00}. ( Or if you really want to XXXX them, do a charge-back on the entire amount. In their own words, " reservation XXXX was not picked up ''! Just kidding. ) ( Lastly, please note the amount of my initial dispute was a bit more, and I'd like to be super explicit that I'm reducing the disputed amount. There's *yet another* XXXX document I haven't attached ( but did provide previously ) showing the higher value, but I can't follow the arithmetic to reproduce it, so it doesn't seem fair to XXXX. ) Please let me know if I could provide any additional clarity surrounding this dispute. I'm open to the idea that I've been unclear ( or even incorrect! ) about something. : - ) Thanks, ~XXXX  XXXX XXXX On Wednesday, XX/XX/2021, XXXX XXXX  EST, XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : Good morning, I disputed an XXXX XXXX charge from XXXX ( submission attached dated XXXX XXXX ). I received a response from Citi ( attached dated XXXX XXXX ) that requested additional information. I didn't have the info when I initially submitted the dispute, but I do now. 

( Because Citi 's response doesn't provide guidance on how to provide the additional information... ) I used the Citi live chat webpage and spoke to XXXX in Disputes, he said to email this address with it. 

The additional information is attached ( undated ), it's rental agreement no. XXXX. ( It clearly shows my XXXX XXXX number XXXX, which matches prior dispute submissions, and also clearly shows a *much* higher weekly rate, which *mismatches* prior dispute submissions. ) Please re-open the dispute and incorporate this new information, and let me know how it goes. As is clear from this documentation, all prior claims I made in my dispute submission were true and accurate. ( I just couldn't prove it without this receipt! ) Thanks, XXXX XXXX XXXX