Consumer complaint received 2023-10-05
Product: Credit 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: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (CA)

I have asked Capital One on several occasions for an explanation as to how they are making the determination that a charge on my account is both legal and legitimate. They have told me numerous things including : we are on your side this is XXXX making this determination ; there is an XXXX  address given which validates the charge ; even though a phone scammer obtained your card information fraudulently it is not fraud because you gave them the information. The XXXX address they cite is located in XXXX, a state that I have never been to, and with a hotel receipt can prove was not my location during the time the charge was made. I can also prove the XXXX address is not from my phone, and that my phone was not in communication with that XXXX address at the time of the charge. To Capital One, however, these irrefutable facts are not sufficient enough to have them even so much as ask for further evidence. I find Capital One 's lack of diligence placed on disputed transactions to be a clear indication of their policies designed to produce results that keep transactions in place, no matter how fraudulent, in order to maintain the transaction fees and associated revenue for their shareholders. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I was tricked into believing that a number on XXXX was for XXXX. Placing a call to that number, a woman answered by presenting herself as XXXX XXXX Assistance Department. Through her deceptive persona, she easily obtained my credit card and personal information, as a longtime member I fully trust XXXX. After our phone call, I received a text message from a company called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX with a receipt for a XXXX purchase. I was not familiar with this company and gave them no authorization to run my credit card, and on XXXX occasions I made immediate phone attempts demanding a refund, each time they placed me on hold. 
During this same time, I called Capital One to flag this transaction as illegitimate, and was told that I need to wait for the charge to post first. On XX/XX/23, after the charge posted, I engaged Capital One to have the fraudulent charge removed from my account, and they told me I had to file a dispute. I provided Capital One with a detailed record of what took place. Capital 1 sent me a reversal of things after obtaining records from the merchant. These records were clearly filled with lies and fabrications. I responded to the merchants claims with significant evidence, including phone records, text receipts, and hotel bills that documented many of the XXXX XXXX claims as lies and fabrications, including, that the XXXX address used to process the charge was not mine and was in a completely different State than I was in at the time ; that the claim that I was provided with a payment link including terms and conditions to process the sale never happened ; and that I never received any good or service related to the charge. Capital One, an hour after receiving the XXXX pages of documentation I submitted on XX/XX/23, closed my case citing that I did not provide evidence. I placed a phone call to Capital One on XX/XX/23 to inquire about the decision, and a representative cited the reasoning for their decision. Specifically, he told me that I did not submit a statement to the fact that I did not receive any good or service, nor did I submit a statement that I was not provided terms and conditions of the sale prior to the charge being made. I explained to him that in fact, my letter does contain those exact statements and point him to the XXXX and XXXX sentences of my signed letter. He did not care what I had to say about the issue, and made it clear that despite the basis for their decision making absolutely no sense he would not be doing anything to reverse the decision and he would not be providing me with any further details that actually do make sense. 
The morning of XX/XX/23, I called back to Capital One to see if I could speak to a supervisor in hopes of gaining more clarity around their decision. I spent over an hour on the phone with a person named XXXX, who also gave me no information about their decision that makes any sense. He did try several times to provide me details from the XXXXXXXX XXXX documentation as a legitimate basis, however, each time I pointed him to areas from my documents that directly refute what he was saying. 
For example, he brought up the XXXX address as the reason, and when I asked him where the XXXX address location was, he gave a location in the State of XXXX I directed him to the evidence I provided, proving that I was in XXXXXXXX XXXX over XXXX miles away at that time. His response was " well I am not sure about the technical stuff '', and then went on to tell me that there is nothing I can do to overcome the XXXXXXXX XXXX  documentation. I asked to speak to the person who made this determination, because I wanted to speak with the person who apparently does know about the technical stuff, as this was clearly used as evidence to support the claim, when it is actually irrefutable evidence to deny the charge. He responded that supervisors like him are the ones that make these determinations, and refused to connect me with anyone including the person who evaluated the situation and made the determination, and also refused to give me any clarity as to how Capital One is allowing him to use XXXX address information as a basis to validate a charge, but then when faced with the fact that the XXXX address is actually proves the opposite, he is able to respond by stating that he is not good with the technical stuff. 
I believe that I am being forced to accept a fraudulent charge because of poorly trained employees of Capital One making decisions they are not equipped to properly scrutinize and then covering up their poor judgement for self preservation of their jobs. However, if this lack of diligence extends beyond my specific situation, then Capital One is engaging in policies in an effort to earn revenue off of fraud. Either way, I should not be held to simply accept a fraudulent charge under these circumstances.