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: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns American Express 's handling of a credit card dispute, not the underlying merchant transaction. My concern is that American Express failed to engage with substantive evidence I submitted, applied the wrong chargeback framework to my dispute, and issued a final determination through a boilerplate response in under 12 hours that could not have involved meaningful review. On XX/XX/XXXX, I made a {$12000.00} purchase from a merchant at the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX. I filed a dispute with American Express on two specific grounds. First, material misrepresentation of FDA regulatory status. The salesperson, the merchant 's email correspondence, and the parent company 's public website all represented the product as FDA cleared or FDA approved. These representations are demonstrably false on the public FDA record. The only clearance the merchant has cited FXXXX XXXX ( k ) XXXX covers a device named " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX '' in three specific models. The product I was sold is not named in the clearance. The merchant 's own submitted receipt confirms the device sold to me includes microneedling and laser components, which are regulated under separate FDA product codes and are not covered by XXXX. The parent company also received a public FDA Warning Letter on XX/XX/XXXX, regarding this exact pattern of misrepresentation. Second, unauthorized billing. The signed receipt the merchant submitted as their own evidence shows a total of {$12000.00}. My American Express statement shows a charge of {$12000.00}. This is an {$86.00} overbilling above the signed amount. The merchant has never explained this discrepancy in any communication or in their evidence package. I flagged the discrepancy to American Express multiple times and it has been completely disregarded. My original Amex submission in XX/XX/XXXX included the merchant 's full email correspondence ( in which they cited XXXX in writing ), the XXXX XXXX ( k ) Summary, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the signed receipt, my account statement showing the actual charge, a screenshot of the parent company website 's " FDA approved '' claim, and a contemporaneous written record of the verbal misrepresentations. American Express initially issued a provisional credit. Approximately two weeks later, the credit was reversed. The reversal email stated that the merchant had provided a signed Record of Charge and that my account was being rebilled. The merchant 's evidence package addressed only chargeback reason code C31 ( " Goods/Services Not As Described '' ), highlighting one defense : that a signed receipt constitutes acceptance of goods as provided. My dispute was not filed under C31, and the signed receipt is not responsive to either of my actual grounds. In fact, I included a copy of the signed receipt in my original dispute, so it's clear American Express didn't review my evidence initially. American Express 's determination did not engage with the FDA documentation I submitted or with the {$86.00} billing discrepancy proven by the merchant 's own evidence. I called American Express and requested that the dispute be reopened and escalated to a senior dispute analyst. I submitted a supplemental statement identifying the two grounds, citing the merchant 's own submitted evidence as corroboration of both, and explaining why a signed Record of Charge does not address a misrepresentation claim or an overbilling claim. I received a boilerplate response in under 12 hours stating that the original decision stands. The speed and form of that response indicates that no meaningful review of the supplemental evidence occurred. My concerns with American Express 's conduct : 1. American Express applied chargeback reason code C31 ( " Goods/Services Not As Described '' ) to a dispute filed on misrepresentation and unauthorized billing grounds. The signed-ROC defense the merchant invoked is dispositive under C31 but is not responsive to either of my actual grounds. 2. American Express did not engage with federal regulatory documentation I submitted, including a public XXXX XXXX ( k ) filing and a public FDA Warning Letter directly relevant to the misrepresentation claim. 3. American Express did not address an {$86.00} unauthorized overbilling that is proven by the merchant 's own submitted documentation, regardless of the broader misrepresentation dispute. 4. American Express issued a final determination on my supplemental statement in under 12 hours, by boilerplate response, indicating that no meaningful human review occurred. 5. The merchant operates from a XXXX airport kiosk under multiple storefront names, with XXXX-based customer service. The cardmember protections American Express advertises exist precisely to address situations where the cardholder has limited practical recourse against an offshore merchant. Those protections were not meaningfully applied here. I am requesting that American Express conduct an actual substantive review of the dispute on its filed grounds federal regulatory misrepresentation and unauthorized billing in excess of the signed receipt rather than under the chargeback reason code the merchant chose to respond to. At minimum, I am requesting that the {$86.00} overbilling, proven by the merchant 's own submitted evidence, be credited to my account regardless of the disposition of the broader misrepresentation claim. The products remain in my possession, unopened and in original packaging. I am prepared to return them upon American Express 's instructions.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation