Consumer complaint received 2025-09-07 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this follow-up complaint regarding my Citi Simplicity Card account ending in XXXX. This matter is directly related to my prior CFPB Complaint # XXXX, which Citibank responded to but failed to resolve. 

In that prior response, Citibank admitted that : The account was allegedly opened over the phone, and therefore no signed application is available. 

No written contract or application exists that establishes my liability. 

They failed to provide any documentation showing that this account is legally tied to my Social Security Number ( SSN ending in XXXX ). 

They only provided monthly billing statements, which do not serve as legal proof of liability or validation of debt. 


Despite these admissions, Citibank continues to send collection emails demanding immediate payment of over {$9600.00}. 

This behavior violates multiple consumer protection laws : 1. Lack of Verification and Proof of Ownership Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ), credit information must be accurate and verifiable. Citibank has failed to provide : A signed contract or original application. 

Proof that this account is legally associated with my SSN ending in XXXX. 

Anything beyond billing statements, which are not sufficient to validate debt. 


Without such proof, the account is unverified and inaccurate. Continuing to collect or report on this account constitutes a violation of the FCRA. 


-- - 2. Improper Collection Practices Even though Citibank is collecting on its own account, its actions are misleading and abusive. Under the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692e, it is unlawful to use false, deceptive, or misleading representations in connection with the collection of any debt. 

Sending billing statements and payment demands as proof of liability is deceptive because such documents are not proof that I ever entered into a legal agreement with Citi. This is an attempt to misrepresent account records as legal validation. 


-- - 3. No Reporting Basis Under the FCRA This account has already been deleted from TransUnion after my dispute, precisely because Citi could not validate it. It no longer exists in any credit bureau ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). 

For Citi to continue collection attempts after failing to prove ownershipand after the credit bureaus deleted the account for lack of verificationis a direct violation of FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to correct and delete inaccurate or unverifiable information. 


-- - 4. Ignoring Prior Complaint and Arguments In my first CFPB complaint ( # XXXX ), I specifically requested : 1. Proof that this account is tied to my XXXX ( ending in XXXX ). 


2. A signed contract or application demonstrating liability.

3. Full validation of the alleged debt. 



Citi ignored all of these arguments. Their only response was that they had no signed application, and instead they sent billing statements. This is not validation under the FCRA. They also deflected responsibility onto the credit bureaus instead of addressing the lack of legal proof. 


5. Ongoing Harassment Despite the lack of validation, Citi continues to send me collection emails demanding payment of over {$9600.00}. This is harassment and constitutes unfair and deceptive conduct under both the FCRA and FDCPA standards.

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 non-monetary relief