I submitted a request to the bank ( Bank of America ), on ( or around ) XXXX XXXX, 2017, requesting that disputes be initiated against a merchant CT Option ) on the basis that the merchant provided me with services that were defective/not as described. I provided the bank with a detailed write-up that included : The specific services which the merchant was expected and required to provide The dates by when these services were justifiably expected to be provided ( per the card networks rules, this was within 120 days of when the disputes were requested ) An explanation, along with documentation and evidence that proves that the services the merchant did provide were clearly defective/not as described Verification of my attempts to resolve these issues with the merchant prior to requesting that disputes be raised against the merchant The merchant ( XXXX XXXX ) claimed to be an investment/brokerage company, that offered an investment/brokerage account which could be used to invest and trade ( actually buy and sell ) regulated financial products. In reality, the merchant is not an investment or brokerage company and is not able to hold or deposit client funds for any purposes. All transactions were processed and deposited into the merchant 's own account. In lieu of an investment/brokerage account ( which I proved the merchant was never able to provide ), the merchant provided a simulation or video game of trading. This was done with the clear and specific intent to deceive me, and make it seem that my deposits ( which were never deposited anywhere ), were lost as the result of movements in the market, instead of stolen at the time of processing.

In claiming to be a brokerage/investment company, and in further claiming to be able to execute trades and investments of regulated financial products ( stocks, commodities, indices, etc. ), the merchant ( XXXX XXXX ) was required to provide the following services : Use my transactions to actually fund the investment/brokerage account the merchant claimed to provide Provide access to the investment/brokerage account which was able to be used to execute trades and investments involving the regulated financial products the merchant claimed to provide.

In the documentation provided to the bank, I verified and proved that the merchant is not actually a brokerage/investment company and : Never used my processed transactions to fund any type of brokerage/investment account ( since they are unable to provide these accounts ) Never provided access to an investment/brokerage account that could be used to invest and trade in regulated financial products ( since the merchant is not a broker, they have no access to these products and markets ).

The merchant was required to provide both of these services for the duration of my maintaining an account with them. I documented to the bank that I maintained such an account well within the 120 days during which a dispute can be raised on the basis of services being defective/not as described.

The bank ( Bank of America ) has refused to initiate disputes citing the following reasons : The transactions occurred too long ago to be disputed. I have provided the bank with a detailed explanation that shows and proves that the services were expected and required to be provided within 120 days of when I requested dispute be raised ( per the card networks dispute rules and requirements. The bank appears to have either not read my explanation and reviewed the proof I submitted, or has chosen not to initiate disputes, despite the card networks specifically allowing disputes to be raised.

Since the merchant provided services, even though I was not satisfied with the results of their services, the merchant was still entitled to payment. The bank has apparently not bothered to read through the information I presented. In this information ( some of which is summarized above ) I was very clear that the nature of my dispute has nothing to with my satisfaction of the services provided. My disputes were requested on the basis of the merchant providing services that were not as described. If I purchase a tablet and receive a pair of socks, this is not a case of not being satisfied with what was provided. The merchant is required to provide the services they took my funds for. I have proven that they merchant has failed to do so. The bank seems not to have read through my case, and has informed me that they will not accept any further communication about this case. This is unacceptable.

Am example of the bank 's repeated templated response is included below.