Consumer complaint received 2025-12-22 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Charged too much interest
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
This is a follow up to my previous complaint, number XXXX, since your online system did not allow me to leave feedback as requested. The pacifier keeps going round and around until a timeout message appears. I have tried at least a couple times, with no luck. Below is my feedback/reply to Citi 's response : Subject Hello, I am responding to Citis letter in connection with CFPB Case # XXXX. 

Citis response fails to address the core issue raised in my complaint : the misleading way Citis payment system is designed and presented to customers, which reasonably causes consumers to believe they have made an additional or separate payment when, in fact, Citi silently reclassifies that payment as satisfying the Minimum Payment Due.

In Citis online system, when a customer selects Make a Payment, there is no clear, prominent, or meaningful disclosure that the payment will automatically be applied to and subtracted from the Minimum Payment Due, rather than being treated as a standalone payment toward specific balances. This design creates the false impression that the customer has paid amounts over and above the minimum, when in reality Citi later claims the customer has only made the minimum payment. 

This structure is inherently misleading. A reasonable consumer would conclude that making a payment particularly after being instructed by a Citi representative to do so to avoid interest constitutes compliance. Instead, Citis system conceals the remaining obligation, unless the customer logs in frequently, understands Citis internal payment hierarchy, and manually recalculates what Citi will later determine was still owed. This is not transparency ; it is a trap. 

Interest charges do not appear immediately. By the time a consumer discovers the issue when the statement finally generates the damage has already been done. This design effectively guarantees interest accrual while shifting blame to the customer, despite the customer following Citis explicit instructions and acting in good faith.

Citis reliance on generalized Card Agreement language does not cure this problem. Disclosures buried in agreements do not excuse misleading user-interface design, ambiguous payment labeling, or instructions that contradict how payments are actually applied in practice. Consumer protection standards require clarity, not technical compliance that obscures material consequences.

I relied on Citis guidance and on the reasonable interpretation of its payment interface. The interest charged was the direct result of Citis misleading system design and instructions not customer error.

I maintain my request that Citi : Reverse all improperly charged interest, Correct any resulting account impact, and Cease using payment mechanics that mislead consumers into believing they have satisfied their obligations when they have not. 

Payment systems that obscure material information and predictably lead to consumer harm should not be tolerated. Such practices undermine trust, violate the spirit of consumer protection laws, and warrant corrective action. 

Respectfully, XXXX XXXX

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