Consumer complaint received 2023-12-04 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: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I filed a dispute with Barclays in XXXX for a charge on XX/XX/2023 for {$2700.00} because the plumber failed to complete a project. Specifically, this is my original dispute message to Barclays : A tenant reported sewer smell in the building. XXXX the plumber went out, told me the issue and said he'd come back to fix them. He sent me the bill after a few days with pictures of the problematic parts, I thought everything was resolved. However, the tenant reported the issue persisted. I thought it's more of a warranty issue. My property manager and I have been contacted him for weeks but we couldn't get him out to finish the job and later were not able to get in touch with him. The tenants were threatening to escalate, so we have to get another plumber, turns out the toilet was not replaced, the pipe was not fixed, the bathtub fixture was not replaced. Those were all listed in the invoice and I need to pay another plumber to fix essentially most if not all of the items listed, and potentially escalated actions from tenants. 

After not receiving any updates for months, on XX/XX/2023, Barclays called and left a voicemail, asking me to reply within 2 business days or else the case will be closed. I called within a few hours, they wanted me to fax or mail the invoice of the original plumber, invoice ( s ) of the work to complete the project since the original plumbers departure, and a second opinion letter stating the original plumber did not finish the work, within 48 hours. At that time, I have requested Barclays to provide all supporting documents and correspondence provided by the merchant to me. Due to the tight deadline, I had immediately contacted all the contractors who have involved with the project to see whoever is able to provide the second opinion within the timeframe. Note that at that time, Barclays did not mention the second opinion letter had to be from a licensed plumber. Therefore, one of the contractors who witnessed the entire event was able to provide a letter attesting the original plumber did not finish the project, and we had to hire another plumber to complete the project. 

One day after XXXX request, on XX/XX/2023, I had faxed my supporting documentations. After that, I had not received any updates from Barclays for two weeks. I decided to follow up on XX/XX/2023 to confirm if the XXXX fax was received and the status of the case. I was told by Barclays that the fax was received and the case was still investigating as of XX/XX/2023. 

However, I noticed later that night a rebill amount {$2100.00} was charged on my account on XX/XX/2023. Worrying about the previous phone rep might not had enough permission to see the full status on the case, I decided to send a secure message immediately on XXXX online portal. I got a response shortly after that the secure message system was not able to handle dispute cases. Therefore, I called again on the next day on XX/XX/2023. Barclays had initially told me the case was still investigating with no update. After I have pushed for an explanation on the rebill amount of {$2100.00} on XX/XX/2023, they told me a letter was going to be sent out and they can not disclose the reasoning over the phone until I received the letter. Note that I had yet to receive any supporting documents and correspondence provided by the merchant to Barclays at that point, so I had requested such information again during the call. I have also requested to apply a provisional credit of {$2100.00} that was rebilled on XX/XX/2023 until the case is resolved, I was told it can only be done after I received the letter. 

I had finally received the letter on XX/XX/2023, dating on XX/XX/2023, stating the following reasons : We were not provided with proof that the merchant agreed to refund the credit card account. 
We were not provided with a valid second opinion as previously requested. 

I was never told to provide the first piece of proof, and I had already provided a second opinion letter within a calendar day, and confirmed by Barclays that they had received it. The letter also mentioned that I had to contest the case within 10 days of receiving the letter. Therefore, I called immediately on XX/XX/2023 upon receiving the letter. At that time, I was told the second opinion letter had to be from a licensed plumber, which I was never told before, and I had to provide that within XXXX hours of this call. I mentioned it will be a challenge to get that letter from a licensed plumber, I was then allowed to provide such letter until next Friday ( XX/XX/2023 ). I was also assured that the case was still open, and since I had contacted Barclays, the case will not be closed until the deadline of XX/XX/2023. I had again requested to apply a provisional credit of {$2100.00} that was rebilled on XX/XX/2023 until the case is resolved, I was told they will send in that request only after I have submitted the documents. 

Since I didnt have the direct number of the plumber, I had to contact the office of the plumbing company, and the master plumber was on vacation so it takes a few days to get permission from him. Nonetheless, I had stressed the importance to have this promptly, I was able to obtain the letter XXXX business days later on XX/XX/2023. I had immediately faxed it to Barclays and called after a few hours to confirm if the fax was received. I was told that faxes take XXXX hours to receive, but they had already closed my case on XX/XX/2023, 15 days after the XX/XX/2023. I believe the representative I talked to on XX/XX/2023 did not take any necessary steps to log our conversation and kept the case open. I was told during that call that the case could only be reopened upon receiving the fax. 

I have called again a day later on XX/XX/2023, I was told the XXXX fax was received. The case will now be reopened since documents were received. I had again requested to apply a provisional credit of {$2100.00} that was rebilled on XX/XX/2023 until the case is resolved, I was told only the investigation team could do this and she had submitted the request. 

After having no updates and no provisional credit for XXXX weeks, I followed up on XX/XX/2023. I was told the case was already closed. Meaning the representatives on XX/XX/2023, XX/XX/2023, and XX/XX/2023 did not take any steps to reopen the case at all. At that point, as a customer, I was not sure if they had able to add any notes to my seemingly closed case. I asked to escalate this case to a supervisor, and I was told I will receive a call within XXXX hours. 

I received a missed call from a Barclays supervisor on XX/XX/2023. However, the voicemail did not leave any direct call back number or a number that leads to the escalated department. In the voicemail, she said I may return the call at the standard XXXX number. Therefore, I had to call again and went thru the entire escalation process again to ask and for a supervisor call back. During this call, Barclays continued to change the goal post. The agent said they were unable to accept the latest second opinion letter because it was not in a formal business letter head which was not previously communicated by any of the XXXX previous agents. 

The supervisor called in the morning despite I requested for a call back at a different hour on XX/XX/2023. She acknowledged my point that the requirements were not specified regarding the second opinion letter on the original request ( it had to be a licensed plumber from the call on XX/XX/2023 ) and the follow-up request ( the letter had to be in a company letterhead from the call on XX/XX/2023 ). I went into great details on the exact specification on this second opinion letter in hope that Barclays doesnt change the goal post on me again. She was not able to confirm what information was needed in the letterhead ; she did not even answer the question of if company name, address, and phone numbers were required. She just said it just needs to be in a company letterhead, suggesting to me that theres no written standard for this requirement or if this was just a requirement made up by the previous agent on the fly and the subsequent agents had to follow thru with that. While inquiring in details on exactly what else were required from me to reopen this case, she said a statement was required on the fax requesting the case to reopen, which was never disclosed to me in the previous three calls.

I had faxed the revised second opinion letter with company letterhead and a cover letter stating this is a formal request to reopen this dispute case on XX/XX/2023. I had also made clear again that if any part of my dispute was rejected, I would like to request for a detailed itemized breakdown of the {$2100.00} line ( multiple repairs ) provided in the merchants invoice on exactly which line item was completed and could be supported with proof and which line item was not completed nor finished. 

Since I didnt see any provisional credit applied to my account for another week, I called Barclays XXXX XX/XX/2023, I was told the XXXX fax was received. The rep, similar to the previous experience, did not have any updates nor had more information regarding to my request of applying the provisional credit of {$2100.00} until the case is resolved. Therefore, I have requested for a supervisor to call back. Similar to last time, I had requested a call back in the afternoon and was assured that a call back number will be provided in case I did not pick up the phone on time. 

I received the call back in the morning, different than the requested call back time similar to last time, on XX/XX/2023. Unfortunately, I was not able to pick up the call at that time, and the voicemail did not leave any direct call back number. Similar to the previous experience, I had to call the general number again and went thru the entire escalation process again. 

A Barclays supervisor was able to call me back on XX/XX/2023, ensured to me the case was reopened and informed me the new case number. I was told again that the provisional credit of {$2100.00} will be requested. 

I called Barclays to ask for an update on XX/XX/2023. The rep said theres no update at this point but she said interest rate will not be charged for the disputed amount of {$2100.00}. Since there were no indication online, in the statement, or a separate notification letter regarding this, I requested for something in writing. The rep was not able to provide anything in writing other than this verbal confirmation, without mentioning any an end date for this interest rate waiver. 

On XX/XX/2023, I received letter dated XX/XX/2023, saying my claim is declined again due to : Merchant has not violated the terms and conditions of the contract Insufficient proof of cancellation We were not provided with sufficient proof that the merchant has agreed to refund the account For the first point, since Barclays did not mention that the second opinion letter is insufficient, I expected Barclays has accepted this document. The second opinion letter has clearly stated that the merchant did not fully complete the project, clearly a violation of the terms and conditions of the invoice/contract. 

On the second point, given that the merchant did not respond to any of communications at all until this date, this was a cancellation on his part. With this, the cancellation proof of burden should not be on me as I always intended for the merchant to complete the project in a timely manner, and the project was halted for a significant amount of time, just to wait for him to respond and eventually get back to the site and finish the project. 

Lastly, I had repeatedly requesting Barclays to provide me with all supporting documentations provided by the merchant, which Barclays had failed to provide as of this date, unless the two-page invoice from XX/XX/2023 ( which I have also provided to Barclays ) XXXX the only time and everything the merchant provided ( as in, no additional correspondence nor letter was provided by the merchant ). If that was the case, it meant the merchant had failed to explained the fact that the project was not finished according to the second opinion letter, did not provide a detailed itemized breakdown of the {$2100.00} line ( multiple repairs ) provided in the merchants invoice, and did not provide proof on exactly which line item was completed. When the merchant did not respond or provide with an agreement to Barclays to refund the account, it should not mean the customer had to seek out directly to the merchant for such agreement as the core of this dispute was due to the Merchants lack of response both physically and over all communications method.

Given that Barclays has promised that zero liability should be bear by the customer in these situations and this case has extremely strong evidence to show that the merchant did not finish the work. I think it is unfair for Barclays to decline this claim.

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