Consumer complaint received 2020-07-07
Product: Credit card or prepaid card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: CITIBANK, N.A. (MD)

On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a billing dispute with Citibank regarding a charge on my credit card in the amount of {$20000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX by XXXX XXXX XXXX. Ms. XXXX was hired by me for interior design services for my home in XXXX XXXX, MD. The {$20000.00} was a retainer to procure these services. In the contract between myself and XXXX, all items and services must be pre-approved by me. Ms. XXXX purchased items and furnished my home that were not approved by me. In addition, a balance of {$9000.00} was leftover in the retainer, confirmed by Ms. XXXX via email. I have made Ms. XXXX aware on several occasions that I will not pay for the items not approved by me and would like the remaining balance of my retainer remitted to me immediately. Ms. XXXX admits that she does not have my retainer money. 

In addition, I have spoken to Ms. XXXX XXXX  attorney regarding the matter without success. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an e-mail from Citibank requesting additional information regarding the dispute. On the same day XX/XX/XXXX, I remitted the following to Citibank via e-mail : emails between Ms. XXXX and I ; emails between Ms. XXXX 's attorney and I ; a copy of our contract ; a copy of my veteran designation from the Maryland Department of Veteran Affairs ; and a statement of service from the United States XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent Citibank via e-mail a copy of all of the invoices from the interior designer, which were several pages. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from Citibank stating, " We have received your recent response ; however, we require some additional information in order to continue to dispute this charge. We need a confirmation whether you received any goods from this merchant. If yes, we need the date you received the goods and the date you attempt to return the goods or the date you made the goods available for the merchant to pick up. '' On XX/XX/XXXX, I replied to Citibank via email stating, " Yes, I received goods from the merchant. I have received various goods throughout late XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX XXXX would drop off various items on several different dates. Most of the time I was not home as I had multiple hospital visits for a medical condition. I attempted to return goods several times in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Ms. XXXX stated 'I am definitely refunding you your money for the products returned or not purchased, immediately as the funds become available to me. In 25 days you will have been refunded in full. ' In addition, I spoke with Ms. XXXX lawyer around approximately XX/XX/XXXX and told him that I do not want the goods since they were not approved by me. However, Ms. XXXX lawyer did not seem responsive regarding my request. In addition, Ms. XXXX lawyer insisted that I sign a nofault settlement agreement in order to obtain the retainer balance of approximately {$9000.00}. '' On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an e-mail from Citibank stating " We have received your recent response ; however, we require some additional information in order to continue to dispute this charge. We need the exact dates you received the goods from this merchant along with detail description of the goods and the date you attempt to return the goods or the date you made the goods available for the merchant to pick up. '' On XX/XX/XXXX, I replied to Citibank via email stating, " Ill need time to review these documents. Im a XXXX XXXX working under the XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX of XXXX responsible for XXXX XXXX XXXX   across the country during this COVID pandemic. Did the merchant respond yet? Do you fully understand the dispute because Im not sure if you do understand it. What is your position on the {$9000.00} retainer balance that the merchant has kept. What is your position on all of the invoices sent to you? I dont want to run in circles wasting time because Im extremely busy working for the country. '' On XX/XX/XXXX, I accessed my Citibank app and discovered that the dispute was resolved in the merchant 's favor on XX/XX/XXXX. Furthermore, the dispute details section of the app stated " We made a strong case on your behalf - but unfortunately, this dispute was resolved in the merchant 's favor. We've outlined the details of our resolution online in your Notices and Letters. '' However, I checked the " Notices and Letters '' section immediately after and found no such letter detailing the resolution. 

First, I believe that Citibank has violated the Fair Credit Billing Act by not resolving the dispute within two billing cycles. The dispute was filed on XX/XX/XXXX and after providing Citibank with massive supporting documentation on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, they do not respond again until XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX requesting additional information. 

Second, Citibank never responded to my XX/XX/XXXX email in which I stated that I was a " XXXX XXXX working under the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX responsible for XXXX XXXX XXXX across the country during this COVID pandemic. '' Third, I provided Citibank with a copy of my statement of service on XX/XX/XXXX, which verifies that I am a XXXX XXXX of the United States XXXX XXXX XXXX. I am currently detailed the XXXX of XXXX XXXX of XXXX ( XXXX ). My duties include assisting with the deployment of emergency medical personnel to various areas of the country during the current COVID-19 national emergency. 

Fourth, I also had medical problems from XX/XX/XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX requiring physician 's care. 

Fifth, I have recently been XXXX twice during the month of XX/XX/XXXX alone and have had to undergo several medical tests and attend multiple medical appointments. 

Sixth, I believe that Citibank has knowingly violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act ( SCRA ). SCRA covers XXXX XXXX members of the Public Health Service. In addition, " Servicemembers absent from duty for a lawful cause or because of sickness, wounds or leave are covered by the SCRA. '' Furthermore, the Supreme Court has held that the SCRA " must be read with an eye friendly to those who dropped their affairs to answer their countrys call. '' Restated, the SCRA should generally be read in favor of the servicemembers it is intended to protect. 

Seventh, I believe that Citibank has violated the COVID-19 National Emergency Presidential Declaration dated XX/XX/XXXX.