Consumer complaint received 2023-05-24
Product: Credit card or prepaid card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card
Company: CITIBANK, N.A. (PA)

On XX/XX/2023, I received a text from Citibank asking if I attempted to bill {$1500.00} in flights on XXXX. I confirmed I did not, and they opened a fraud investigation. They asked if I had any other charges I didn't recognize. I saw that there was a charge on XX/XX/XXXX for {$270.00} with XXXX. documentation they are a car rental company. I have never used them and also reported it was a fraudulent charge. Citibank sent me a new card. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I was checking my account and saw that I had another XXXX  charge for {$270.00} on XX/XX/XXXX, same day that I closed my account. When I called to say that was fraudulent, they said that charge must have been pending when I closed my original credit card number. They closed my second credit card number and issued me a new 3rd credit card number. 

During this time I received some mailings telling me that I had started a fraud investigation and some emails. I also received numerous emails from citibank reminding me of due dates and offering me other products. 

I went to check my statement on XX/XX/XXXX and saw that the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX charge for {$270.00} was back on my statement. I was very surprised and saw that there wasn't an option to click that I don't recognize this amount. I called customer service and they informed me that I had a notification in my account issued on XX/XX/XXXX. This document stated the vendor said the charge was accurate and provided " compelling '' evidence that it was my charge. As I didn't even know I had a notification, they default reversed the fraud complaint and noted the investigation was closed on XX/XX/XXXX. 

I looked in my email, I have received 28 emails for due dates and product offerings since XX/XX/XXXX. This might not even be an inclusive number because I could have deleted some. However they did not manage to email me stating I had an action needed for this fraud investigation. This was hidden several pages deep in my online account. 

I looked at the " compelling '' evidence that XXXX provided to Citibank. While the name and home address for charge is mine, the IP address is in Georgia- I live in Pennsylvania. The email address listed is XXXX which is not my email address. Moreover, this charge was the same timeframe as fraudulent XXXX  charges. 

When I talked to Citibank on XX/XX/XXXX, I said this is still fraud and I verify that I did not do these charges. I also emailed their fraud department, per their request on XX/XX/XXXX. They said they would reopen the case. 

I checked my account again on XX/XX/XXXX. The charge is still there. I called and did customer service chat. While they said, yes they will reopen the case they would not and could not provide me documentation that the case was " reopened ''. Specifically, customer service rep XXXX XXXX indicated I " would not be liable for the charges and interest ''. That said, it still on my account and due. They indicated that I should call XXXX directly. I also did this yesterday and told them it was a fraudulent charge. They indicated they would investigate. 

My understanding of my rights under the Fair Credit Billing Act is that they must conclude their investigation in 2 billing cycles. My billing cycles closed on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. Their notification on XX/XX/XXXX that they had new compelling evidence is outside the 2 billing cycle time period of investigation. 

I have 2 issues : 1. This is fraud and should have been handled with more care by Citibank.

2. Their " communication '' process for notifying customers they need additional action is inadequate at best. Based on the several emails and mailings I have received from them in this timeframe, it is reasonable to assume that is the form of communication that they would use to contact me for additional information. This random notification several pages deep on the account portal with time sensitive information is not appropriate.