Consumer complaint received 12/19/2017 about Credit card or prepaid card (General-purpose credit card or charge card) with CITIBANK, N.A. (NJ).
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Sub-issue: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement

Complaint: OnXX/XX/XXXX I authorized the payments for a service to be rendered. The seller told me to give him 30 days to prove that he can perform the service. If after 40 days I 'm not satisfied that he will not only give me back my money but he would compensate me just for giving him to opportunity to prove that he can perform the service. 
After after many attempt to have the service performed as promised, on day 37 I inform the seller that I wanted to get my money back, I have n't heard from the seller. I pulled up my credit card statement to see how the payment was charged, then I see it was done through a payment processor by the name of " XXXX '' I contacted them through their website, which by the way was different from the website that the seller marketed his services. 
XXXX told me that they have to send an authorization request to the seller since the seller authorized them to only refund up until 30 days. I told them that was a shock to me send the seller offered a 40 days money back guarantee. They told me that I should hear from the seller with 24 to 48 hours. ( I have attached my correspondence transcript document as " Cancellation Attempt 1 '' & Cancellation Attempt 2 ) On day 39 when I have n't hear from the seller, XXXX told me that there was nothing they could do on their hand because they need authorization from the seller since they were only aware of a 30 days therefore was not able to verify the 40 days money back guarantee ) Soon after I contacted my credit card company to dispute the transaction since I felt I was the victim of a scam, which was on XX/XX/XXXX. 
On XX/XX/XXXX I received a E-Communications from my credit card company with a response from XXXX about the dispute. 
On XX/XX/XXXX I respond to my credit card company with documentation as proof showing each response that I could prove to be a lie. ( The correspondance transcript document is also attached as " XXXXXXXX Email to Citi Dispute '' ) On XX/XX/XXXX I received another E-Communications from my credit card company not telling me that there was a problem with my documents provided but telling me that it seems that I 'm disputing the quality of the service and that they could weigh in. 
I inform Citi that I was n't dispute the quality but the actual service that I thought I was paying for. 
On XX/XX/XXXXI received a letter informing me that Citi could help me any further that I was to contact XXXX to see if they could help. 
On XX/XX/XXXX I responded saying that if it could have been resolved with XXXX I would n't have a need to put in a dispute for this transaction and CC XXXXXXXXXXXX, which I was told to do from my own research online on how to resolve this issue from the response received on the XX/XX/17 letter. 
I received a call from that unit would told me to give them some time to review all the documents. After 2 or 3 day I received another call not telling me that my documents were not accurate but that they could n't help because no one can reach the seller and that they could only go with the 30 days money back guarantee that the seller told XXXX and that is now showing on the seller website. 
I told the Citi rep that I have the seller on a recorded video guaranteeing the 40 days and as well as a pdf printed the powerpoint presentation that the seller used to offer his service. The rep told me that both the video footage and the powerpoint presentation are not sufficient. 
That 's why I continued my research on how to resolve this situation and I found your website. And that 's why I 'm filing this claim because I feel that both XXXX and Citi are facilitating scam artists like this seller to get away with people 's money without providing any services for those stolen funds.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation