Consumer complaint received 2026-05-13 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit 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: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
We are submitting a complaint regarding the handling of a disputed account by Synchrony Bank related to a financed purchase of multiple home appliances from third-party retailer, XXXX XXXX . This matter involves a failed transaction ( wrong and defective goods delivered ), the merchants refusal to remedy, and serious concerns regarding Synchrony Banks investigation process and billing practices during an active dispute. In XX/XX/XXXX, I was guided by salesperson XXXX to purchase appliances over the phone from XXXX XXXX and finance them through a Synchrony Bank credit card account. The purchase was made through guided telephone sales assistance where I relied on representations made by the salesperson XXXX regarding product suitability and inventory availability. The purchase was not made independently through an online self-service process for example. I explained to XXXX that I was looking for specific models not available at XXXX XXXX, Lowes, or XXXX XXXX that were flush mount and had no visible vents. He claimed that the models I was looking for were in stock and available for immediate delivery. He then encouraged me to take advantage of the Synchrony Bank credit card financing option offering 15 months 0 % APR. I opened an account and paid for the XXXX order of {$8300.00} in full. Although the appliances were ordered in XX/XX/XXXX, they were not shipped until XX/XX/XXXX - through no fault of our own. XXXX XXXX repeatedly notified us about shipping delays, and refused to send one appliance at a time instead forcing the entire order to be delayed and delivered at the same date and time. Despite the delivery delays, monthly payments started several months before receiving the appliances. We had begun payment on damaged and wrong appliances months before we were able to approve them. Upon delivery, the process was rushed by the delivery personnel. They delivered four ( 4 ) large appliances within XXXX minutes ( please see delivery slip with notated delivery times from XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX to XXXXXXXX XXXX attached as Exhibit 1 ) and did not allow any time for inspection. They simply said a signature was required as acknowledgement of delivery only. It was only later we discovered that : Two appliances were the wrong products ( a wrong model of XXXX dishwasher was delivered with a visible vent on the front panel which I did not approve and the wrong XXXX oven that did not fit flush to my kitchen cabinets like my previous XXXX model ) ; One appliance arrived damaged ( the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ) ; and One appliance ( refrigerator ) had structural issues ( drawers did not function properly ) and subsequent cooling failure after a repair person damaged the internal structure. Only once the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was opened and the other appliances installed were the issues discovered. Attempts were then made within 24 hours of delivery to return the damaged XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and within 1-2 days of delivery to return or resolve the issues with the remaining appliances. While XXXX XXXX accepted the return and refund of one damaged appliance ( the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), the process was made unreasonably difficult requiring us to provide a wooden pallet and rope for return. We were also charged an exorbitant return fee despite XXXX XXXX stated 30 day return policy. Attached as Exhibit 2 is a series of email communications detailing the negotiation process between my husband and I with XXXX XXXX Customer Service Representative XXXX. The details of the emails are as follows : XXXX with XXXX XXXX initially wanted to charge us a return fee of {$750.00} ; We countered with a return fee of 10 % of our total XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( price {$2000.00} ) of {$200.00} ; XXXX then stated she would charge a return fee of {$390.00} as long as we provided a wooden pallet and rope for the return ; and XXXX ultimately charged us a return fee of {$270.00}, a fee much higher than the 10 % fee we were comfortable paying and was listed on the XXXX XXXX invoice. Additionally, the consumers ( my husband and I ) are older individuals ( seniors ) who were expected to immediately unbox, inspect, maneuver, and potentially repackage multiple ( four ) large and heavy appliances within an extremely limited delivery window. Despite these practical limitations, we still acted promptly and successfully arranged the return of one of the items within 24 hours ( the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), only to incur substantial return and restocking fees, and substantial negotiation delays. These circumstances further demonstrate the unreasonable nature of the merchants handling and return process as well as the bait and switch nature of this purchase. Upon installation of the XXXX refrigerator, we recognized right away that the drawers and shelves within the appliance were not able to slide properly on the tracks or be readjusted. Due to this, XXXX was notified and scheduled a series of repair appointments from a separate and independent repair company called XXXX XXXX XXXX . Many of the appointments were cancelled by XXXX XXXX XXXX resulting in measurable losses, including wage loss for time off work. During the repairs on the refrigerator, the following was determined : The drawers were confirmed to be defective, new drawers were ordered on many occasions - none of which fit or worked within this model of refrigerator ; Repair technician XXXX XXXX stated that because the drawers were defective, a new refrigerator would need to be ordered. He failed to do so. Instead ; On the last repair appointment, repair technician XXXX XXXX, in an attempt to provide a makeshift repair for the drawer tracks, removed the refrigerator backing, bent and repositioned the cooling/electrical coils, and cut out large amounts of insulation from the refrigerator. I have the insulation pieces that were cut out as well as the several extra drawers that were ordered and did not fit, and would be happy to provide pictures of them. XXXX XXXX DID NOT ask for approval from myself, my husband, or XXXX before materially changing the refrigerator from factory standards. As a result, the XXXX refrigerator drawers and shelves were never repaired and the refrigerator subsequently began experiencing cooling issues that had not previously existed. And XXXX XXXX and XXXX left us without repair or replacement while allowing the warranty to expire despite our consistent attempts at grievances. In emails back and forth with XXXX XXXX customer service representative XXXX, the damage done by the XXXX XXXX repair technician was completely disregarded. Please see Exhibit 12 of the certified mailed physical copy of our Formal Escalation for complete attachments including detailed emails, documentation of failed repair attempts, and no solution reached by XXXX XXXX or XXXX for the wrong and damaged goods they provided us. XXXX XXXX refused to accept returns for the remaining XXXX appliances and directed the matter to the manufacturer ( XXXX ) , resulting in multiple unsuccessful repair attempts. Despite extensive efforts ( including over 100 pages of documented email communications, service visits, and attempted repairs ), the issues were never resolved, and the warranty period expired without remedy. An initial Formal Grievance was filed with Synchrony Bank on XX/XX/XXXX ( attached as Exhibit 3 ), which was ultimately denied. The first denial dated XX/XX/XXXX ( attached as Exhibit 4 ) appears to have been determined by an unidentifiable written statement attributed to XXXX XXXX that : Was unsigned ; Was not on company letterhead ; Was provided by an unknown individual that the consumer never interacted with ( XXXX XXXX ) ; Provided no contact information like a phone number or email ; and Omitted substantial portions of the documentation timelines and evidence. Synchrony Bank did not appear to meaningfully consider the extensive documentation provided by the consumer, including photographs, service records, and email communications demonstrating good faith efforts to resolve the issue. This raises serious concerns regarding the adequacy and fairness of the investigation. After the denial of our Original Formal Grievance, we reopened the claim as instructed in the denial letter by submitting a Formal Escalation to Synchrony Bank, dated XX/XX/XXXX ( attached as Exhibit 5 - due to the CFPB portal submission limit, only the letter is attached to the online submission. A complete copy with all attachments has been sent to the CFPB in a physical certified mail copy ). On XX/XX/XXXX, Synchrony Bank received the Formal Escalation ( dated XX/XX/XXXX ) confirmed via USPS delivery tracking attached as Exhibit 6. On XX/XX/XXXX, Synchrony issued a written acknowledgment ( attached as Exhibit 7 ) stating : The dispute was under active review ; and Interest charges would NOT accrue on the disputed charges during the investigation. Additionally, on XX/XX/XXXX, we received a voicemail confirming receipt of Formal Escalation ( attached as Exhibit 8 ). However, on XX/XX/XXXX, I received my XX/XX/XXXX statement ( attached as Exhibit 9 ) which shows that - while the dispute remained open and unresolved - Synchrony Bank : Assessed {$2000.00} in deferred interest ; and Issued a statement treating the full balance as due. This directly contradicts Synchronys written representation that interest would not accrue during the review process. The assessment of interest during an active investigation materially prejudices the consumer by inflating the disputed balance before the dispute has been resolved. On XX/XX/XXXX, we received a second denial letter from Synchrony Bank ( attached as Exhibit 11 ). The reason provided is simply Synchrony is unable to validate that there was a quality defect. This reason is materially implausible. Synchrony Bank, XXXX and XXXX XXXX have been passing the blame between each entity. No single entity will comply with appropriate investigative and resolution practices. As a result, XXXX has allowed the manufacturers warranty on the appliances to run out by the expiration date of XX/XX/XXXX. Despite submitting by certified mail Formal Grievances and Formal Escalations to each entity, no resolution has been reached- this account has remained in continuous active dispute since the appliances have been delivered. My husband and I, the consumers, have made substantial efforts to accommodate service scheduling, troubleshooting, and repair access, yet the matter ultimately has remained unresolved. The prolonged insufficient handling of the matter and repeated unsuccessful repair attempts raise serious concerns regarding lack of meaningful warranty remedies provided by XXXX ( and XXXX XXXX ), consistent with obligations under the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Despite submission of substantial additional documentation during the second Formal Escalation - including extensive written communications, documentation of repeated failed repair attempts, and evidence that one damaged appliance was successfully returned- the second denial issued by Synchrony Bank relied on the same unsupported merchant narrative previously used in the first denial. No new investigation was performed and Synchrony Bank did not meaningfully address or reconcile the substantial evidence provided by us, the consumers. XXXX XXXX has implied that they have a 30-Day Return Policy, when they do not. They actually are operating under an All Sales Final policy without informing their customers. Salesperson XXXX never informed me during my guided phone purchase that damaged appliances could not be returned however in the unsigned, non-letterhead written statement attributed to a purported XXXX XXXX representative XXXX XXXX that was supplied as evidence for denial from Synchrony Bank states that XXXX XXXX XXXX does not return installed appliances. This statement was never disclosed prior to purchase and would have caused me to not purchase appliance through XXXX XXXX had I been informed. Instead, large appliance retailers like XXXX XXXX provide free, 30-day returns. Why would anyone purchase from XXXX XXXX when they operate under an all sales final approach and do not disclose it to customers? Lastly, XXXX XXXX has relinquished any responsibility associated with the wrong and damaged appliances sold to us under an undisclosed all sales final policy. Instead, theyve shifted all responsibility to the manufacturer XXXX . Despite this, Synchrony Bank has failed to properly implicate XXXX in its investigations and simply claims there is no evidence of quality defect when the evidence is abundant - detailed documentation of which have been provided by certified mail to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, and Synchrony Bank. This case reflects not only a failed transaction but also a breakdown in dispute handling and billing practices. The consumers made extensive good faith efforts to resolve the issue, yet have been left with defective goods and a significantly inflated balance during an unresolved dispute. Again, this account has remained in continuous dispute since the appliances have been delivered. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the CFPB requires Synchrony Bank to : Remove all interest charges assessed during the dispute period, including the full {$2000.00} charge ; Fully refund the charge incurred of all appliances, including exorbitant shipping fees, associated with returning the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX ; Fully refund the installation costs for installing wrong and/or damaged appliances ( totaling {$670.00}. Invoices attached as Exhibit 10 ) ; Reimbursement of financial losses for a total of {$1400.00} incurred while awaiting unreliable delivery and repair appointments ( XXXX XXXXXXXX 7 Days ) ( please see EXTENSIVE details regarding the repeated delivery and repair cancellations and reschedules caused solely by XXXX XXXX on Exhibit 12 ) ; Reimbursement of {$60.00} for the wooden pallet and rope requested by XXXX XXXX for the return of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( please see EXTENSIVE details regarding XXXX XXXX absurd return practices and financial losses caused by them in Exhibit 12 ) ; and Written confirmation ( not verbal ) that no negative credit reporting or adverse impact to my credit score has occurred or will occur as a result of this grievance or any other billing dispute pursuant to applicable California law . In support of the details herein, attached please find the following : Exhibit 1 : Updike Delivery Slip ; Exhibit 2 : Series of email communications detailing the return fee negotiation process between consumers and XXXX XXXX Customer service Representative XXXX for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ; Exhibit 3 : Formal Grievance to Synchrony Bank dated XX/XX/XXXX ; Exhibit 4 : First Synchrony Bank Denial dated XX/XX/XXXX ; Exhibit 5 : Formal Escalation to Synchrony Bank dated XX/XX/XXXX ; Exhibit 6 : USPS Delivery Confirmation of Formal Grievance dated XX/XX/XXXX : Exhibit 7 : XX/XX/XXXX letter from Synchrony Bank acknowledging receipt of Formal Escalation and confirming that interest charges would not occur during the investigation period ; Exhibit 8 : Transcription of XX/XX/XXXX voicemail from Synchrony Bank confirming receipt of Formal Escalation ; Exhibit 9 : Synchrony BankXXXX XXXX Account Statement displaying a {$2000.00} interest charge despite Synchrony confirming interest would not be charged during an open investigation period ; Exhibit 10 : Two ( 2 ) receipts detailing the installation costs associated with the installation of wrong and/or damaged appliances - one {$320.00} installation fee and another fee for {$350.00} totaling {$670.00} ; Exhibit 11 : Second Synchrony Bank Denial dated XX/XX/XXXX ; and Exhibit 12 : Complete Formal Escalation package dated XX/XX/XXXX ( Due to the CFPB portal submission limit, only the letter is attached to the online submission. A complete copy with all attachments has been sent to the CFPB in a physical certified mail copy ). Additional photographs and details are available to submit as supporting documentation upon request. For clarity, verbal outreach does not satisfy written grievance acknowledgment or resolution requirements, particularly where written documentation is explicitly requested. Given the strong nature of this ongoing dispute and the extensive documentation involved, and the continued financial prejudice caused during an active investigation, we are prepared to escalate this matter to additional state and federal consumer protection authorities if necessary. Due to the online portal attachment limits, only a portion of the documentation is included here. A complete record of communications, service history, attempts to resolve directly with the companies, and supporting evidence has been certified mailed to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to your written response and efforts toward a full and amicable resolution.

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