Consumer complaint received 2026-05-21 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: NH

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year>, I was charged {$1700.00} by a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX I disputed {$1100.00} of the charge through my Apple Card issuer ( Goldman Sachs ) because the facility failed to disclose known staffing and capability limitations before performing and billing for extensive XXXX XXXX The facility 's own signed discharge letter confirms they knew they lacked XXXX and XXXX capability that weekend a fact that existed before I arrived and before any procedures were performed. XXXX also misrepresented that XXXX were being administered to my critically XXXX XXXX XXXXen they were not, billed XXXX XXXX XXXX rates for a reading performed remotely by a third-party service without disclosing this, and failed to transfer medical records as promised in writing. I provided Goldman Sachs with extensive evidence including a witness statement, the facility 's own discharge letter confirming the undisclosed limitations, an itemized invoice, a formal complaint letter to the merchant, email correspondence showing the merchant refused to address the complaint, and documentation of state complaints filed with the NH Attorney General and NH XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Goldman Sachs denied the dispute stating 'the goods or services were accurately represented at the time of the purchase ' and 'our records do not indicate that the merchandise has been returned for a refund. ' This is a veterinary service it can not be returned. The dispute process used a product-return template inappropriate for services. When I reopened the dispute on XX/XX/year>, I was transferred to a supervisor ( XXXX ) who disconnected mid-conversation, then to a second supervisor ( XXXX ) who repeated scripted responses, referenced merchant-supplied evidence without identifying what it was, stated I agreed to the merchant 's terms and conditions despite the entire dispute being about undisclosed limitations making informed consent impossible, and asked me to resubmit evidence I had already provided. No representative demonstrated any familiarity with my evidence or addressed any specific point I raised. Goldman Sachs also stated that 'the service was received in accordance with their terms and conditions at the moment the transaction was made. ' I was never presented with or informed of any terms and conditions. The facility 's known limitations were withheld until after procedures had already been performed and billed. I could not have agreed to conditions I was never told about. Furthermore, this framing implies I should have refused to pay and walked out of a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXich is not a reasonable expectation of any consumer. The power imbalance in an eXXXX XXXX XXXX where a pet owner is relying on professionals to save their animal 's life, makes this framing especially unreasonable. A consumer in an emergency can not meaningfully 'agree ' to terms they were never shown while under duress.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation