Consumer complaint received 2026-05-19 00:00:00
Product: Credit 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: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding unresolved statement and balance discrepancies on my Apple Card account issued by Goldman Sachs Bank USA. On XX/XX/year>, I received a partial Apple Store refund of {$290.00} related to a XXXX XXXX financed through Apple Card Monthly Installments. At the time, I had XXXX active installment plans : - XXXX - XXXX XXXX - XXXX Air On XX/XX/year>, I contacted Apple Card customer service twice to ask whether the refund could be specifically applied toward my XXXX XXXX installment plan. During both calls, I was informed that Apple Card could not direct the refund toward a specific installment balance. Relying on the information provided by customer service, I then made an early payment of {$290.00} toward my installment balances on XX/XX/year>. I was informed that Apple Card applies early payments toward the oldest active installment plan XXXX. This payment paid off my XXXX XXXX installment plan and reduced part of my XXXX installment balance. At that time, my non-installment Apple Card balance was already {$0.00}. I left the separate {$290.00} refund credit balance on my account because I believed future monthly installment charges would automatically draw from that credit balance. However, my statements and installment history now contain significant inconsistencies that Goldman Sachs has been unable to explain. My XX/XX/year> statement states that my Apple Card Monthly Installment payments totaled {$140.00} ( {$110.00} for my XXXX XXXX and {$29.00} for my XXXX ) and specifically states : " A credit of {$140.00} was applied to your Minimum Due, reducing your Minimum Due to {$0.00}. '' Despite this, neither installment plan reflects a payment being applied at the end of XXXX. The Apple Wallet installment history also appears inconsistent because : - my XXXX XXXX installment history only shows a payment in XXXX labeled as payment XXXX of XXXX ; - my XXXX installment history jumps from payment XXXX of XXXX in XXXX directly to payment XXXX of XXXX in XXXX. My XX/XX/year> statement again lists installment payments totaling {$140.00}, but states : " A credit of {$23.00} was applied to your Minimum Due, reducing your Minimum Due to {$120.00}. '' Based on these statement figures, only {$160.00} of my {$290.00} credit balance appears to have been applied toward installment obligations, leaving approximately {$120.00} unaccounted for. Additional statement inconsistencies include : - my XXXX and XXXX statements both showing the exact same total account balance of {$1600.00} despite installment obligations supposedly being paid during that period ; - my XXXX statement showing remaining installment balances totaling {$1600.00} while simultaneously showing a total card balance of only {$1600.00} ; - Apple Card representatives being unable to explain how installment balances could exceed the total card balance. I have contacted Apple Card customer service numerous times regarding these discrepancies, including calls on XX/XX/year> and XX/XX/year>. During a 48-minute call on XX/XX/year>, an advisor opened statement inquiry Case # XXXX. I later spoke with Apple Card management and the back office team, but despite multiple escalations, Goldman Sachs has continued asserting that no error occurred without providing a clear accounting explaining the missing funds and statement inconsistencies. On XX/XX/year>, I received an email stating : " Goldman Sachs Bank USA has investigated your Inquiry and determined that no error occurred due to the following reason. Our records reflect that your statement balance appears to be correct. Your statement balance reduced to {$120.00} due to credit balance in your account which was auto adjusted towards your installment due and statement balances. '' This explanation still does not reconcile the discrepancies outlined above or explain where the remaining credit balance funds were applied.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation