Consumer complaint received 2026-06-12 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: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding Capital Ones handling of my dispute involving a {$55000.00} charge to XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year>. I hired XXXX XXXX for a commercial tenant improvement project for XXXX XXXX XXXX. The contractor received three payments totaling {$68000.00}. I am not disputing all of those payments. I specifically excluded the {$4100.00} payment because I acknowledge that some limited preliminary work was completed. My dispute relates only to the XX/XX/year> payments totaling {$64000.00}, including the {$55000.00} charge processed through Capital One. Before I signed the contract, XXXX represented that the project would be completed around XXXX XXXX. I relied on that representation when authorizing payment and moving forward with the project. By XXXX XXXX, the project was nowhere near completion. The work remained limited to early-stage demolition and partial framing while substantial portions of the contracted scope remained unfinished. Major contract items including plumbing rough-in, electrical rough-in, concrete and footings, drywall, doors, trim, paint, and completed usable suites were not delivered as represented. Throughout the project, I repeatedly requested updates, accounting of funds paid, project status information, and an orderly transition when it became clear the project would not be completed as promised. I requested itemized accounting so that payments could be reconciled against completed work. The requested accounting was never provided. I remained willing to resolve the matter professionally and communicated that position in writing. Instead of providing the requested accounting and continuing toward resolution, the contractor stopped work and treated my request as a breach. I was ultimately forced to retain a replacement contractor and incur additional costs to complete substantial unfinished portions of the project. I submitted extensive documentation to Capital One, including payment records, project communications, permit records, photographs, requests for accounting, proof of my efforts to resolve the dispute directly with the contractor, and multiple supplemental dispute letters. I also submitted additional information after Capital Ones initial denial. When I contacted Capital One for clarification, I received differing explanations regarding the denial. I was advised that additional information was needed and that proof of a refund or confirmation from the merchant was required. I could not provide such proof because the merchant disputed my position, never agreed to issue a refund, never issued a refund confirmation, and never provided the requested accounting. Requiring documentation from the merchant who was the subject of the dispute effectively made it impossible to satisfy Capital Ones request. Capital One ultimately denied the dispute and stated only that the information provided was insufficient to validate my claim. The denial letter did not clearly identify what information was missing, did not explain why the extensive documentation submitted was inadequate, and did not explain how Capital One evaluated the evidence demonstrating substantial non-performance of the contracted services. My dispute was never based on a claim that no work occurred. In fact, I specifically acknowledged that some work was performed and intentionally excluded one payment from the dispute. My dispute was based on the contractors failure to complete the contracted services as represented and failure to deliver the scope of work for which payment was made. I am also concerned that the explanation provided by Capital One representatives appears inconsistent with Capital Ones published dispute guidance. Capital Ones public dispute information states that disputes may be filed when a customer paid for a service and did not receive it, only received part of it, or when the service was not delivered as described. My dispute falls squarely within those categories. I never claimed that no work occurred. Rather, I claimed that I only received a limited portion of the contracted services and that the services delivered were not completed as represented. Additionally, Capital Ones published guidance identifies contracts, invoices, photographs, and communications with the merchant as relevant supporting documentation for dispute investigations. I submitted those categories of evidence. Despite doing so, Capital One did not explain why the evidence was insufficient, what additional information was required, or how its denial was consistent with its own published dispute standards. Based on the facts above, I believe Capital One failed to conduct a reasonable investigation, failed to provide a meaningful explanation for its denial, and failed to fairly evaluate the evidence demonstrating substantial non-performance of contracted services. I am requesting that Capital One conduct a full and independent review of the dispute, explain the specific basis for its denial, review all documentation previously submitted, explain how its decision is consistent with its published dispute guidance, and reconsider the dispute based on the evidence demonstrating that the contracted services were not completed as represented.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation