Consumer complaint received 2026-06-06 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers — Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
Description of the Problem : I am a long-standing customer of Synchrony Bank holding a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX store credit card. I am filing this complaint regarding a {$4600.00} deferred interest charge that was applied to my account upon the expiration of a promotional financing period that ended XX/XX/year>. I was enrolled in autopay, which I relied upon in good faith to keep my account current and in compliance with the promotional terms. Because of this, I was not actively monitoring paper statements for a specific expiration date. I did not become aware that the promotional period had ended and that a deferred interest charge had been applied until my XX/XX/year> statement reflected a balance increase to {$12000.00} a jump that was not consistent with my normal payment activity and immediately flagged my attention. Upon discovering the charge on XX/XX/year>, I contacted Synchrony Bank the same day and offered to pay the remaining principal balance in full in exchange for a one-time courtesy reversal of the deferred interest charge. I was transferred to three separate representatives in an attempt to reach someone with the authority to address my request. Each representative I spoke with was dismissive and declined to escalate the matter meaningfully, despite my documented history as a long-term customer with a perfect payment record and no prior delinquencies. My concerns are as follows : 1. Inadequate notification prior to promotional expiration. I received a single notification of the promotional expiration buried within my XX/XX/year> paper statement. Because I am enrolled in autopay a feature Synchrony itself offers and promotes as a convenience I did not open that statement. I received no email notification, no SMS alert, and no separate mailing drawing attention to the impending expiration of a promotion with a {$4600.00} consequence. A single line in a paper statement, sent to a customer enrolled in autopay, does not constitute clear and conspicuous disclosure under the standard a charge of this magnitude requires. Industry practice for deferred interest expiration notifications includes proactive multi-channel outreach precisely because the financial consequence is severe and retroactive. 2. Deferred interest is an inherently predatory structure. Unlike standard interest which accrues incrementally, deferred interest charges the full retroactive interest in a lump sum, creating a financial shock that bears no relationship to the consumer 's payment behavior. I made every payment on time. I was not delinquent. Yet I was hit with a {$4600.00} charge in a single billing cycle. This practice disproportionately harms consumers who are acting in good faith. 3. Failure to provide meaningful customer resolution. Upon contacting Synchrony on XX/XX/year> the same day I discovered the charge I acted in good faith and offered to pay the full principal balance immediately. Synchrony 's representatives refused to consider any accommodation, offered no path to escalation, and provided no written response or follow-up. This is inconsistent with reasonable customer service standards and suggests a systemic practice of denying reversal requests regardless of individual account history or circumstances. Requested Resolution : I am requesting a full reversal of the {$4600.00} deferred interest charge as a one-time courtesy, with the understanding that I will pay the remaining principal balance in full upon confirmation of the reversal. Alternatively, I am open to a negotiated partial reversal. I am not seeking to avoid my legitimate financial obligation I am seeking relief from a charge that I believe was inadequately disclosed and that Synchrony 's customer service refused to address in good faith. I have been a loyal customer with a perfect payment record and I am asking for the same consideration any reasonable financial institution should extend to a customer in good standing.

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