Consumer complaint received 2022-09-02 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I filed several disputes on unauthorized ATM withdrawals and unauthorized transactions amounting to a grand total of {$13000.00} made on or about XXXX to XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. I have several dispute numbers, such as : XXXX, XXXX and XXXX. 

On the XXXX of XXXX, XXXX in my home in the XXXX, I received their letters dated XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX. In the letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, my dispute case was denied stating that all of the 10 unauthorized ATM withdrawals of a total {$3800.00} appear to be consistent with your normal banking activities, though they are not. 

I am therefore exercising my right to appeal this denial of the ATM withdrawals in the amount of {$3800.00} as well as to appeal the dispute of the unauthorized charges amounting to {$13000.00}. I have yet to receive any resolution on my dispute on the unauthorized charges. Given the time it has taken, I will interpret this to mean that my dispute on this issue on the fraudulent charges has also been denied and thus I likewise appeal the denial of said charges. 

On the XXXX of XXXX, XXXX, I called the Citi XXXX Department at XXXX and advised them that I wanted to appeal the denial of my dispute. I spoke to XXXX and XXXX of the dispute department and both advised me to file my dispute via facsimile. 

I maintain my position that my debit card was hacked by unauthorized persons who made charges without my consent. To prove that I had no hand in these charges, I again reiterate that I never use my debit card in the XXXX as I have local cards which I use in the XXXX from XXXX. My entire transaction history from the XXXX of XXXX in which I first obtained my card ending in XXXX will attest to this. More importantly, once I learned that Citibank was of the position that it was denying my dispute, I reported the incident to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX Police ( PNP ) on the XXXX of XXXX, XXXX. 

Attached are my Complaint-Affidavit of dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX filed with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX appearance attesting that I appeared at the XXXX to XXXX my complaint dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, the PNP Anti-Cybercrime Team Certification on the police report dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, the PNP Anti-Cybercrime Team Certification on the supplemental report dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Also attached are photos comparing the fake debit card used by the unauthorized person and his fake drivers license with my actual debit card and drivers license, along with a photo from the XXXX footage from XXXX XXXX where the unauthorized person made a purchase worth {$8800.00}, and finally the charge slip which the imposter signed with a clear forgery of my signature. The photo taken from the XXXX footage clearly shows that the person who made the transaction using the fake debit card and drivers license was not me. 

Supplemental report in relation to investigation being conducted by this Group relative to complaint filed by dated XX/XX/XXXX for violation of R.A. 8484 otherwise known as the Access Devices Regulation Act of XXXX as Amended by R.A. 1149 and pursuant to Sec. 6 of R.A. 10175 dated XX/XX/XXXX with XXXX XXXX no. XXXX. Initial Investigation revealed that on XX/XX/XXXX at about XXXX ) XXXX XXXX male ( 1 ) individual transacted at XXXX XXXX located at XXXX XXXX, New XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX to purchase gold jewelry amounting to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dollars and XXXX XXXX Cents ( {$8800.00} ) equivalent to ( XXXX ). Copy of documents pertinent to the said transaction showed that a Citibank Credit Card under the name of account holder with expiry dated of XX/XX/XXXX was used, and as proof of identity, said individual presented a Drivers License under the name of the account holder with false license number XXXX. Relative thereto, herein complainant presented his drivers license with a different license number to compare with the one presented for the transaction and found that said IDs were dissimilar. Likewise, herein complainant further averred that the signature on the invoice was not his signature. In corroboration, XXXX footage was viewed and showed that the individual who made the said transaction was not one and the same as complainant. 

I have also hired a XXXX XXXX lawyer XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, who has reported the incident to Citibank in the United States and who has been coordinating with XXXX XXXX XXXX the Citibank Branch XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX where I opened my account. He has not responded to inquiries since the XXXX of XXXX. 

This appeal has merit because it is clearly not me who made these charges as shown in the photo taken from the XXXX and in attached photos comparing the real debit card ending in XXXX and the fake debit card ending in XXXX. A comparison of the fake drivers license with my drivers license reveals the clear and distinct differences in height, weight, license number, agency code, blood type, DT codes and even the signature used in the fake license compared with those found in my actual license attest to the merit of this appeal. 

I simply do not know anymore what else Citibank will require for me to prove these charges are unauthorized. I did not make these transactions. The evidence is clear and convincing. 

I await your response. You may contact me through my lawyer XXXX XXXX XXXX at XXXX, Suite XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, New York NY, XXXX or via his email address XXXX, who I have executed a special power of attorney to represent me in this matter.

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