On XX/XX/2017, after receiving my Citi Simplicity Credit Card in the mail, I went to an XXXX XXXX to make a purchase. My card was declined at the store and after more than half an hour of speaking to Citi Bank representatives, I was asked to call the Fraud Department the following Monday ( XX/XX/2017 )  and not continue with the purchase. On XX/XX/2017, I contacted the Fraud Department at Citi Bank and the representative assured me that the lock on my account was due to its recency and a large purchase amount. The representative informed me that, in the future, I should contact Citi Bank prior to a large purchase on the credit card and that my account is no longer locked. The representative confirmed that the credit card has been activated for me and the authorized user, my partner. On XX/XX/2017, prior to making a purchase on XXXX, I contacted Citi Bank at XXXX XXXX to inform them of this upcoming large purchase and prevent any complications with the account. Upon calling the first representative ( Rep 1 ), I was told that the number I was calling from ( belonging to the authorized co-member on my credit card ) was not working for authorization purposes and that my account could not be reached. I was directed to use my own number to call back. On the same day ( XX/XX/2017 ) at XXXX XXXX, I contacted another Citi Bank representative ( Rep 2 ) using my own phone number. Upon providing the representative with my phone number for authorization reasons, I was told that the account can not be accessed. Additionally, I was asked to provide any alternative numbers on file for authorization. I informed the representative that my number is the only number remaining on my account ( and I confirmed this on my online Citi Bank account ). She apologized and told me that no access can be made. When asked for clear and full next steps to resolve this issue, Rep 2 was unable to provide any. I proceeded to ask for a supervisor due to this being the second time in one week that my account was locked due to no consistent reason. Rep 2 connected me to a supervisor at Citi Bank by the name of XXXX and ID # XXXX. After explaining the past two authorization issues that I had faced with Citi Bank to XXXX, I was told that the issues will be resolved during this call. XXXX asked for authorization phone numbers again and once the numbers did not work ( despite being the only numbers on file ), XXXX asked for any landline numbers on file. I informed her of the fact that we do not have a landline number and the only two numbers in my possession ( and on file with Citi Bank ) are not working. XXXX continued to push for additional numbers that could help authorize my account, despite no such numbers existing. XXXX proceeded to ask if we had another Citi credit account, the answer to which was no. This led to XXXX asking if I have access to any other credit, savings, or checkings accounts in my name. I provided XXXX with my credit card account at XXXX XXXX. After being put on hold for about 5 minutes, XXXX informed me that she was unable to connect to a XXXX representative and asked for alternative accounts. I provided XXXX with my checking account at XXXX XXXX. After being put on hold for about 10 minutes, XXXX informed me that she was unable to connect to a XXXX XXXX representative and asked for alternative accounts. She specifically mentioned XXXX XXXX being closed, which contradicts what is to come. I provided XXXX with my savings account at XXXX XXXX. After being put on hold for about 10 minutes, XXXX came back on line and began a 3-way conversation with an XXXX XXXX representative. After authorizing XXXX XXXX to share with XXXX information necessary for authorizing my identity, XXXX asked her authorization questions. One of the questions ( whether the savings account was more than a year old ) was never discussed with me prior to being connected to XXXX XXXX. Due to the recency of my account and despite all of the information matching my identity and Citi 's records, XXXX informed me of the authorization failure due to the age of my savings account. At this point, I informed XXXX that I was able to get in contact with XXXX XXXX, despite her earlier claim that they were closed, and that they would be happy to verify my identity and help with the authorization process. XXXX, who seemed to be caught off guard, agreed and took the direct phone number for XXXX XXXX from me. However, prior to connecting with XXXX XXXX, XXXX asked if my current employer can verify my identity. After giving XXXX my employer 's full name, phone number, and address, I was told that the information can not be found on her system. Thinking that this might be due to our affiliation with the headquarter, I provided XXXX with my employer 's HQ information ( address and phone number ). XXXX once again rejected my information and after suspecting that her system is unable to clearly track phone numbers and addresses, XXXX interrupted me and abruptly placed me on hold. After being put on hold for about 10 minutes, XXXX came back on line and began a 3-way conversation with a XXXX XXXX Bank representative. The XXXX XXXX representative verified my information and transferred us to the correct department. The new XXXX XXXX representative followed the verification process and assisted XXXX in verifying my identity for authorization. Once again, XXXX 's last question from the XXXX XXXX representative ( whether the checking account was more than a year old ) was never discussed with me prior to being connected to XXXX XXXX. Due to the recency of my account and despite all of the information matching my identity and Citi 's records, XXXX informed me of the authorization failure due to the age of my checking account. Without allowing me to speak, XXXX continued to tell me that a Citi Bank manager will contact me within 24-48 hours, despite having informed her of the urgency of my purchase and the one and a half hour phone call we had just had. I reminded XXXX of the several points in our call when my phone number, which was the stated primary reason for these calls, was verified and connected to my identity. XXXX agreed with this observation. I confirmed with her that this was all due to allegedly my phone number not matching and she confirmed this, despite earlier telling me that the number does not show on their system. I explained to XXXX the level of alert that this phone call and interactions with Citi Bank from the past week had raised in me and especially how alarming it was to share all of my personal information with her to no avail. She only repeated that a manager will call me within 24-48 hours. I pointed to her that it is highly alarming that despite having told me that my account can not be authorized by my phone number ( due its alleged lack of existence on Citi 's records ), XXXX ended up admitting that the exact phone number was always in the system. She even continued to admit that this has all been due to the recency of my account opening and that the account has not been fully verified since opening. This fully contradicted the conversation I had had with Citi 's Fraud Department on XX/XX/2017 and I pointed this out to XXXX. Being alarmed, I asked XXXX to fully explain why all of my information was needed and specifically why the 1-year rule existed for other bank accounts in order for the verification to be valid. XXXX promised that she will send me a written document detailing this inquiry. As of right now, no such document has been received. Before ending the call, I informed XXXX that these alarming interactions will be reported to CFPB. I asked if this has anything to do with my partner 's, the authorized co-member of my credit card, racial background or our sexual orientation. XXXX confirmed and assured me that it is not due to that. I will ensure to ask this question in every subsequent interaction with Citi Bank. Lastly, XXXX informed me that she has been taking notes and recording our conversation, which I was delighted to hear and look forward to receiving a copy of.