Consumer complaint received 2024-09-26
Product: Credit 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: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA (NY)

The situation is as follows : - In XX/XX/2024 I discovered via social media a mobile game called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) that appeared to be very engaging/interactive and downloaded it from the Apple App Store - The game was a predatory " XXXX '' game with gambling mechanics that encourages users to spend money in order to gain levels and unlock additional game content. I spent approximately {$6900.00} on the game before determining the content in the marketing materials that had originally gotten me interested in the game was materially misleading and the advertised content was not available. 

- Upon doing deeper diligence into the game and it's developers, I had discovered allegations that evidenced the developers were manipulating the game in order to extract additional value from it's players by reducing drop rates on items paid for with premium currency that is needed to unlock additional game content. When confronted with the evidence, the developers admitted that in-game drop rates were materially lower than what is written in the officially published documentation but the issue remains unresolved. 

- Feeling defrauded due to the misleading marketing materials and the evidence of developer-manipulated game mechanics, I requested a refund from XXXX for the in-app purchases on XX/XX/XXXX. The support system automatically accepted the refund request without allowing me to submit additional context for the refund except for a high level drop down selection of " My purchase did not work as expected. '' - The refund request was denied on XX/XX/XXXX. I appealed the decision explained the circumstances within the confines of the XXXX character limit permitted for the submission. 

- The appeal was again denied on XX/XX/XXXX. I called XXXX support, and the support associate I spoke to claimed to have limited visibility into the request and there was no process in place that would allow her to overturn the refund decision. During the discussion she did note there were a few charges that were not included in the original refund request ( I missed including them when preparing the original refund request ) and she opened an additional refund request for those additional charges on my behalf. 

- On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a notification that the additional refund request that the support associate had entered on my behalf was approved. The additional refund request was submitted with the same facts and circumstances as the first refund request, which was denied. Since XX/XX/XXXX, I have attempted to again contact XXXX support and Goldman Sachs to reverse the denial given the approval of the second refund submitted by the support team under the same circumstances as the first request, however, when attempting to contact them the call is either dropped or XXXX tells me I need to talk to Goldman Sachs and Goldman Sachs refers me back to XXXX. Since the credit card is issued by XXXX and Goldman Sachs I'm unsure who the consumer advocate is supposed to be. 

XXXX support denied my initial refund request ( XXXX in-game charges equaling approximately {$6800.00} ) but approved the second refund request that support entered on my behalf ( XXXX in-game charges, approximately {$130.00} ). Both requests were submitted under the same circumstances ( misleading marketing and fraudulent practices by the developer ). Additionally, due to the approved refund of {$130.00}, the developer has restricted my access to the game. 

Attached to this submission are screenshots of the XXXX refund requests indicating the inconsistent Apple/Goldman Sachs refund process ( XXXX approved, XXXX denied ), screenshots from the game 's promotional materials ( none of the content exists - the game is fundamentally different than advertised ), translated evidence of manipulated game mechanics, as well as the developer public relations response, apologizing and indicating the game documentation was false and misleading ( note this has not yet been fixed ), an email to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX situation in an effort to escalate a response, as well as a schedule of the relevant charges ( excluding the {$130.00} refund already received ).