Consumer complaint received 02-07-2017 about Credit card () with CITIBANK, N.A. (CA).
Issue: Late fee

Complaint: Citibank bank chooses to continue to use an automated system and ignore my inquiries. Citibank continues to break law. 

Citibank took over Costco XXXX when a dispute was in process. Citibank chooses to ignore it. 

Month 0 - late charges disputed with Citibank 's first bill to me. I let them know that I received the bill but not the cards. Citibank initially " responded '' to me, but called me by another name and asked for information they had access to with basic customer service skills. I reiterated who am I, and they continued, for months to deliberately refer to me by another name. However, I stopped receiving bills. It seemed like all was well and the account was closed as requested. 

Month 3 - a Collections Agency contacted me by mail claiming I owed the amount originally disputed. 
Immediately requested validation of debt and they did not validate. 

Contacted BBB, but nothing came from that. 
Contacted Citibank online, and once again they continued to refer to me by another name. 
Counsel advised and provided cases to demonstrate that Citibank likes to wait until a lawsuit before attempting to provide service. 

Contrary to law, Citibank continues to charge interest and fees related to the disputed amount. 
Summary of some details : 1 ) Citibank continued to charge fees on invalid amount 2 ) Citibank constantly referred to me as another person 3 ) Citibank refused to provide simple customer service 4 ) Citibank attempted to delay by asking for information they already had and were provided 5 ) Citibank never sent cards in question even when I made them aware of the situation at the time of initial dispute 6 ) Citibank sent statements claiming validation of debt which they know is not true. 
7 ) Citibank chose to ignore fundamental requests when they could have analyzed the situation 8 ) Citibank chooses to apply undue XXXX 9 ) Citibank chooses to ignore their own copy of statements showing that at some point after the dispute a valid purchase charge did occur, which the customer was not aware of. They could have and still can argue that they could apply fees on that amount. However, they have not, because due to in house procedures, they are awaiting a lawsuit against them prior to making any actual analysis of the account in question. 

Counsel has made it clear that as a business, Citibank must do what they can to yield returns for stockholders. This includes defrauding customers and abusing the system. They are so large that the bad word of mouth and negative publicity and small XXXX dollar fines fail to impact their business model. 

I am interested in what Citibank deems a fair business settlement with me at this point. Citibank has clearly broken numerous laws that the CFPB can cite. The customer is now aware of charges that could occur interest, but have no bearing on the original dispute or the laws Citibank continues to break or stress Citibank continues to instill. The miniscule charges Citibank could lay valid claim to pale in comparison the clear claims I hold against them in small claims court, let alone beyond.

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