Consumer complaint received 2026-06-25 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Formal Regulatory Complaint : Citibank Non-Compliance with Federal Regulation Z ( 12 CFR 1026.13 ) and XXXX XXXX Rules Regarding Credit Not ProcessedI am filing a formal regulatory complaint against Citibank for systemic negligence, a severe misapplication of XXXX dispute rules, and a total failure to properly investigate an ongoing merchant fraud billing error under Federal Regulation Z ( 12 CFR 1026.13 ). I am being unlawfully forced to pay for merchandise that was returned to an international merchant, resulting in blatant merchant unjust enrichment.1. Facts and Timeline of the Billing Error : XX/XX/XXXX : I purchased light fixtures online from an entity operating as " XXXX XXXX XXXX. '' The merchant failed to specify a clear delivery window ( stating 3-5 days or 3-5 weeks ). I reached out via email and phone to clarify, but they never responded and operated no live customer service.XXXX XXXX : Having received no communication or delivery to my apartment, I opened an initial dispute for " Merchandise Not Received. " Post-Dispute Event : Approximately 10 days later, the merchant provided automated tracking data showing the items had finally arrived at a transit depot, not my apartment. Because I was undergoing a home renovation and preparing to leave Mexico, I could no longer accept or use the items.The Return : The transit depot automatically returned the packages to the sender. The shipping carrier 's tracking data explicitly confirms that the merchandise traveled back to XXXX and was successfully received and signed for by the merchant.2. Evidence of Persistent Merchant Fraud and Admission : It is well-documented by global consumer protection groups that the " XXXX XXXX '' network ( operating active domains like XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX ) is a known international scam operation. They intentionally stay online to buy social media ads and trick victims, deliberately delaying shipping past a buyer 's timeline to weaponize tracking loops against consumers. The merchant sent me explicit written confirmation via email admitting that they received the inventory back and that I " won the dispute. '' However, they claim a technical glitch in their payment system prevents them from processing a manual refund, stating it would flag as a " double credit. '' The merchant currently physically possesses both my money and the returned merchandise while their storefront remains active online to claim more victims.3. Citibank 's Systemic Negligence and Failure to Act : I filed disputes with Citibank under Case Number XXXX and Case Number XXXXMy specific complaint against Citibank is that each time they opened or reviewed these cases, their dispute department failed to change the dispute category to a returned item issue. They kept the files logged exclusively as " Merchandise Not Received. '' Because Citibank repeatedly submitted the wrong code, the merchant 's automated system simply replied each time with the exact same paperwork showing the original delivery to the transit depot.Citibank 's dispute department actively refused to open a new, separate dispute for XXXX Reason Code XXXX ( Credit Not Issued ), falsely claiming that " additional disputes can not be filed once an original one is filed. " Proving they knew their automated loop was broken, Citibank issued me a {$250.00} token gesture credit on one of the cases, explicitly stating to me on the phone that " there was nothing else they could do '' to force the merchant to pay. They offered nothing for the second case. My cost of items never received were approximately {$750.00} and {$630.00}. This is a severe misapplication of XXXX XXXX XXXX. While a single-dispute limit applies to unauthorized fraud claims, XXXX rules explicitly allow a new Consumer Dispute ( Reason Code XXXX ) if a subsequent event occurs. The return of the merchandise and the merchant 's written acknowledgment of an unissued credit constitute a completely separate violation from the initial delivery timeline. Citibank can not buy out their regulatory obligation with a partial token credit while forcing me to pay the remaining balance for an international scam. Here is how the XXXX XXXX global fraud works. XXXX XXXX scam is a highly coordinated, multi-million dollar global e-commerce fraud network operating across several continents. By utilizing localized storefrontssuch as XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX Torontothey successfully present themselves as upscale local boutiques. In reality, the entire operation relies on deceiving consumers, evading local authorities, and carefully exploiting automated banking loopholes to steal money. According to thousands of consumer complaints tracked on platforms like XXXX and XXXX, the blueprint of how this entire scam operates can be broken down into five distinct phases : Here is how their scam works Phase 1 : The " Bait-and-Switch '' Advertising The scammers steal high-end, professionally shot imagery from legitimate mid-century modern designers and flood social media platforms ( primarily XXXX and XXXX ) with heavily discounted ads . Phase 2 : Missing Electrical CertificationsBecause the items are cheaply sourced overseas, they do not possess required regional safety certifications ( such as XXXX in the XXXX, XXXX in XXXX, or XXXX in XXXX XXXX ). When victims hand these light fixtures to certified local electricians, the professionals legally refuse to install them due to fire hazards and incorrect local voltage. Phase 3 : Silent Customer SupportThe phone numbers listed on their websites are entirely fake. If an order is requested to be canceled immediately after purchase, the system automatically ignores it. Email support is entirely operated by an automated bot system designed to run out the clock, stall for time, or offer offensive, low-ball partial refunds ( e.g., offering {$10.00} back on a {$400.00} broken fixture ). Phase 4 : Weaponizing Shipping Depot LoopsThis is the core phase of their banking exploitation strategy. The network purposefully uses vague shipping windows ( e.g., " 3-5 days or weeks '' ) and fails to provide direct residential door delivery. Instead, they intentionally rout the packages to regional postal depots or transit hubs.By dropping the package at a general depot rather than your home address, they delay delivery just long enough to cause logistical issues.When consumers inevitably can no longer collect the item ( due to a renovation finishing or moving out of the area ), the depot marks the item as " returned to sender. '' Phase 5 : The " Double Credit '' Banking TrapOnce the items travel back to their overseas warehouse, the scammers spring their final credit card loophole : When the victim files a " Merchandise Not Received '' dispute with their bank, the scammers ' automated merchant system immediately uploads the initial shipping barcode showing the package arrived at the regional depot.Because banks use automated software to check basic delivery pings, the merchant wins the automated dispute, and the bank closes the case.Once the case is closed, the merchant emails the consumer politely claiming, " We see you won the dispute, so we can not manually refund you because our system flags it as a double credit risk. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX for the Scammer : The consumer 's bank case remains closed, the merchant blocks the manual refund, and the scammer legally keeps your money and takes back the physical lights to resell to the next victim. The " You Won the Dispute '' email is one of the most calculated and psychologically manipulative steps of the entire XXXX XXXX scam. They use this specific tactic to completely shut down communication, silence the victim, and freeze the banking process so they can pocket your money.Here is exactly how they use this trick to execute the scam:1. When a victim contacts XXXX XXXX to demand their money back after tracking shows the items were returned to XXXX, the scammer sends a highly polite, automated email that looks something like this : " Dear Customer, we have reviewed your account and we see that you have already opened a dispute with your bank and won the case. Because you won, your bank has already reversed the funds and taken the money from our account. Since you have already been credited by your bank, our system blocks us from issuing a manual refund, as that would result in a double credit. Please contact your bank to access your funds. " XXXX. Why They Say You " Won '' ( The Deceptive Setup ) By telling you that you " won, '' they are actively lying about the state of the banking system. They know that your initial " Not Received '' dispute was actually denied by your bank because they uploaded a delivery scan to a local transit depot.They use the phrase " You Won '' to achieve three malicious goals : To Deflect Blame : They shift 100 % of the responsibility off themselves and onto your bank. They make it look like they are a good company whose hands are tied by a computer glitch.To Stop You From Emailing : If you believe you are already getting your money back from your bank, you will stop harassing XXXX XXXX XXXX customer support email.To Gaslight You : It forces you into a frustrating cycle where the merchant tells you the bank has the money, and the bank tells you the merchant has the money, causing you to eventually give up out of exhaustion.3. Exploiting the " Double Credit '' Software LoopholeThe scam works because their e-commerce payment platform ( usually a third-party processor linked to XXXX or a similar platform ) does have a safety feature that locks a transaction if a chargeback is active.XXXX XXXX purposely leaves the dispute open or unresolved on their end just long enough to lock the system. They then point to this automated technical lock and tell you, " See? Our computer won't let us click the refund button. '' They deliberately use a real software restriction to cover up the fact that they have no intention of ever returning your money. 4. The Ultimate Financial WindfallBecause the front-line customer service agents at Citibank do not understand this loop, the bank leaves the charge on your statement. Meanwhile, XXXX XXXX now has : Your original payment ( which they kept because they won the automated dispute with the depot tracking scan ) .The physical light fixtures ( which were shipped back to their warehouse ) .By telling you that you won, they create a perfect wall of confusion, ensuring that by the time you realize you actually lost the bank dispute, the legal time limit to file a new chargeback has expired.

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 monetary relief