Consumer complaint received 2022-02-23
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. (TX)

RETALIATION regarding CFPB Complaint XXXX. 

This Complaint regards cross-retaliation. I believe that Citibank MasterCard is retaliating in response to my CFPB Complaint # XXXX regarding Citibank VISA XXXX Therefore, my first CFPB Complaint # XXXX concerns my Citibank VISA and this Complaint concerns my Citibank MasterCard and additionally describes the larger context of my numerous disputed transactions. 

Thank you, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX I am the victim and both XXXX and XXXX. 



On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed CFPB Complaint XXXX regarding one transaction that I disputed with Citibank VISA for {$1100.00}. CFPB advised me that Citibank received an immediate notification. 

On XXXX ( two days later ), I received an email notification from Citibank MASTERCARD stating that a new message had posted to my Citibank account. 

I found two letters posted to my Citibank APP, each BACKDATED to XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX, respectively. These two messages were NOT posted to my Citibank APP on the day before, XX/XX/XXXX. And, it does not take five ( 5 ) days for electronic communications from a bank to post to their own APP even USPS routinely delivers paper mail in less than three ( 3 ) days!

The content of each message was substantially the same. All of my OTHER PENDING MASTERCARD DISPUTES with Citibank, TWELVE ( 12 ) in total ( involving two different merchants ) had been terminated. No explanation or evidence for Citibanks decision was offered and my only option to revive these disputes was by MY PRESENTATION of evidence of chargeback CONSENT-TO-REFUND FROM MERCHANT! which obviously is NOT possible in a disputed situation. 

Furthermore, Citibank indicated in both letters ( by my inference ) that IT DID NOT KNOW THE TRANSACTION IDs to which my other prior-refunded transactions corresponded. 

Finally, I was NOT advised by Citibank MASTERCARD of the possibility of any continued effort, such as pre-arbitration. I was only notified that my twelve ( 12 ) other disputes were considered by Citibank MASTERCARD to be complete. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I requested pre-arbitration for the twelve ( 12 ) disputed transactions that Citibank MASTERCARD identified as not-yet-refunded but complete. Subsequently, I discovered a thirteenth ( 13th ) not-yet-refunded transaction and requested the missing transaction to be added to my request for pre-arbitration. This problem arose because Citibank has NOT been communicating with me using the unique dispute identifiers ( XXXX ) and, furthermore, has NOT communicated all of its final determinations with me. I have multiple transactions of the same dollar amount so it has been extremely difficult for me to track Citibanks poorly or not communicated decisions. AT THIS TIME, I HAVE REQUESTED PRE-ARBITRATION REGARDING ALL MY NOT-YET-REFUNDED CITIBANK MASTERCARD TRANSACTIONS THAT OCCURRED BETWEEN MYSELF AND BOTH XXXX XXXXXXXX AND XXXX XXXX XXXX 

ADDITIONAL IMPORTANT INFORMATION : For context and clarification, please be aware that I was ensnared in over four ( 4 ) dozen fraudulent or incompletely performed transactions involving two ( 2 ) different merchants, XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXX, over the course of approximately ten ( 10 ) months. I disputed each and every one of these numerous transactions with Citibank MasterCard, Citibank Visa and XXXX XXXX XXXX and a few transactions were voluntarily refunded upon my initial requests so they did not require the dispute process. 

To date, I have recovered roughly $ XXXX ( across three credit cards and two merchants ) using the dispute process. These remaining ( cancelled ) disputes concern thirteen ( 13 ) transactions, totaling about $ XXXX, that have not yet been refunded to me. In the course of the dispute process, I have also learned that both businesses with whom I had dealt are NOT registered in California as required by Law in other words, they are sham-front operations for whom Citibank MasterCard & Citibank Visa have laundered my money. I now believe that both sham-fronts are, in fact, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which might too be a sham-front as it is affiliated with the recently USPTO-sanctioned widespread trademark fraud that originated in XXXX. 

All of my transactions when conglomerated constitute high-dollar felony crimes. These crimes have been reported by me to the FBI twice ( XXXX Field Office by telephone on XXXXand at : tips.fbi.gov on XX/XX/XXXX ), USPTO in multiple email communications ( where I also reported the criminal impersonation of a US government official that regarded these disputes ) and to XXXX XXXX XXXX. To date, my very serious complaints have gone without Federal ( FBI & USPTO ) or XXXX XXXX XXXX intervention or assistance. I am confident there are thousands of additional victims of substantially identical crimes.