Consumer complaint received 2026-03-24 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:
STATEMENT OF FACTS A. Parties Consumer : Cardholder. Creditor/Card Issuer : American Express . Merchant : XXXX / XXXX. B. Amounts in Dispute XXXX separate charges of {$360.00} each ( total {$730.00} ) posted with Transaction Date : XX/XX/XXXX. C. Timeline/ Material Facts 1. First purchase ; immediate activation without required steps On XX/XX/XXXX, I purchased XXXX prepaid mobile plans from XXXX totaling {$360.00}, intended to transfer XXXX existing numbers to XXXX. Immediately after the purchase, XXXX system activated the plans within approximately one minute, without me completing required activation steps ( e.g., without scanning any QR code ). 2.Immediate merchant contact ; refund represented ; instructed to repurchase I contacted XXXX immediately XXXX A XXXX representative stated a refund could be processed for the first purchase and instructed me to repurchase the same plans to complete the number transfers. 3.Second purchase made in reliance on XXXX instruction Relying on XXXX instruction, I made a second purchase of {$360.00} later on XX/XX/XXXX for the same intended services. Both charges posted with Transaction Date : XX/XX/XXXX. 4.Repeated follow-ups ; Lycamobile reference numbers XXXX did not issue the promised refund despite repeated follow-ups. During phone communications, XXXX provided multiple reference numbers, including : XXXX / XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX Disputes with American Express and Denials XXXX. Disputes filed I disputed both posted {$360.00} transactions with American Express : XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ; {$360.00} ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ; {$360.00} ) 6. AMEX denials / rebilling rationale American Express denied both disputes and rebilled both amounts. American Expresss written denial rationale states the merchant asserted card member did not cancel the services and that the services were under the card members possession. Supporting document 1 and 2 : AMEX denial notices/screenshots for XXXX and XXXX. E. Key Contradiction : Merchant Written Admission 7. XXXX FCC response admits duplicate purchases and refund obligation In a written response to an FCC complaint ( Ticket XXXX, dated XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX states, among other things : Refund tickets were opened under XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX because the plans were purchased mistakenly. After I disputed a duplicate transaction, Following the chargeback, your line was automatically blocked. XXXX of the XXXX transactions were indeed accidental duplicate purchases and These XXXX orders should have been refunded through XXXX standard refund process. Supporting document XXXX : XXXX FCC response letter dated XX/XX/XXXX ( Ticket XXXX ). Why this matters : AMEX denied based on no cancellation / in possession, but XXXX own FCC letter admits the core issue was accidental duplicate purchases that should have been refunded and that the line was blocked after chargeback, contradicting the merchant narrative AMEX relied on. After repetitive contact with AMEX, AMEX failed to address and resolve the dispute based on factual evidence. F. Service Denial / Additional Harm ( supports not in possession ) XXXX. XXXX blocked/suspended service during dispute ; replacement service required After the dispute/chargeback process, XXXX blocked my service and I could not use the affected lines. This is consistent with XXXX statement that accounts/lines are automatically blocked after a chargeback. Because the lines were blocked and I needed working phone service, I had to purchase replacement phone plans/new numbers.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation