Consumer complaint received 2023-06-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit card or prepaid card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card
Company: CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
Re : Citizens Bank Master Card Account XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Holder : XXXX XXXX, died XX/XX/XXXX Former Authorized User : XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : Approximately {$2400.00} of charges incurred in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX As I worked to resolve this issue of unauthorized credit card use after my mother passed on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, my treatment by Citizens Bank led me to make the following written statement : These combined actions give strong consideration to the theory that this is about far more than a fraudulent {$2400.00} debt. Perhaps Citizens Bank has a systemic problem and this is just the tip of the iceberg, requiring investigation by experts outside the banks influence. Little did I know at the time that the Consumer Financial Protection Board ( CFPB ) was already investigating Citizens Bank for very similar complaints. 

Specifically, CFPB 's XXXX lawsuit alleged Citizens Bank failed to reasonably investigate consumer claims of unauthorized credit card use and failure to issue proper credits when such unauthorized card usage had occurred. The suit resulted with a {$9.00} XXXX dollar fine to Citizens Bank, in XXXX, to satisfy findings of wrong-doing by the CFPB. My experience appears to contradict Citizens Banks general counsels claim that the issues " were self-identified and voluntarily addressed years ago. 

In fact, Citizens Bank refused to acknowledge this credit card fraud even after it was provided to the Chairman 's Office on a silver platter. Specifically, XXXX XXXX, from the Chairman 's XXXX, can attest that she had considerable difficulty obtaining a response from a number of departments at the bank, apparently because no one at the bank wanted to take responsibility for these shameful actions of Citizens Bank, especially during a CFPB investigation. 

Citizens Bank continually refused to follow their own written policy to deal with my claim of unauthorized credit card use. This occurred even as the bank was being investigated by the CFPB for mismanagement of customer credit card disputes and fraud claims. All through this arduous process, the banks actions seemed calculated to intentionally create obstacles. The bank silenced their own employees who identified this unauthorized credit card use as fraud. The bank stonewalled my inquiries and failed to provide written notice when Citizens Bank reversed its initial decision that fraud had occurred. Citizens Bank then doubled down by enlisting a notorious second collection agency, XXXX XXXX, to pursue me within FOUR DAYS of reading my letter of complaint regarding this unauthorized credit card use. In fact, XXXX XXXX initiated communication on a SUNDAY. This action has the hallmarks of retaliation. Note that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the first collection agency, had initiated efforts for the {$2400.00} debt, 42 days earlier. 

Citizens Bank made no attempt to collect payment from the unauthorized user even though the bank 's own website stated that their policy was to do so. Per their policy, since the unauthorized user made charges and some payments after the date of death, the unauthorized user assumed responsibility. Citizens Bank had the name and address of the unauthorized user who made the unauthorized charges and refused to pay. Citizens Bank had proof that the unauthorized user had full knowledge that the card holder was deceased when he made the unauthorized charges months after her death. 

Citizens Bank ignored their own written policy and assigned the unauthorized charges to XXXX XXXX estate. THESE UNAUTHORIZED CHARGES WERE INITIATED MORE THAN FOUR MONTHS AFTER HER DEATH! How can Citizens Bank be allowed to hold anyone responsible for charges initiated more than four months after their own death? Citizens Bank allowed the unauthorized user, who incurred the expenses, to walk away without making payment. Furthermore, the bank apparently made no attempt to collect from the unauthorized user and never assigned a collection agency to seek repayment from the unauthorized user. An outside agency needs to oversee a serious investigation into this unauthorized credit card use and why the bank 's written policy was not followed. 

Please see the following letter dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX, from me to XXXX XXXX at Citizens Bank XXXX Office of the Chairman. The letter provides a brief summary and timeline of events regarding the unauthorized credit card use. 


XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NY XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Office of the Chairman Mail Stop : XXXX Citizens Fulfillment Services XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, PA XXXX Re : Citizens Bank Master Card Account No. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Holder : XXXX XXXX, died XX/XX/XXXX Former Authorized User : XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) I am following-up on my letter of XX/XX/XXXX, and emails of XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX fraudulent use of XXXX XXXX Citizens Bank ( CB ) Master Card account. 

Summary : Sole primary account holder died on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX continued using the Card until making his last charge on XX/XX/XXXX. After the death of the sole primary account holder, XXXX made five payments totaling {$6200.00}. All charges incurred prior to the death of the sole primary account holder were paid in full. CB submitted charges, incurred four or more months after the death of sole primary account holder, to the estate of the sole primary account holder. An experienced disputes representative in CBs Fraud Department immediately identified this case as fraud on XX/XX/XXXX. He stated that fraud was committed because the former authorized user both used the credit card and paid some bills after the death of the sole primary account holder. This decision was improperly reversed by someone in CB. CB system notes were deleted and altered to support reversed decision. CB directed two collection agencies to pursue approximately {$2400.00} of fraudulent Card charges. First collection agency initiated written contact on XX/XX/XXXX. Second agency is notorious for their aggressive, predatory, and extra-legal recovery tactics. Second agencys first written notice was dated Sunday, XX/XX/XXXX, four days after CBs Office of the Chairman employee began making inquiries. This timing appears to be retaliatory. CBs Claims Department failed to provide a written response to the Office of the Chairman explaining any basis for reverse of fraud decision. A timeline follows.

Simplified Timeline of Activity Documenting Open and Shut Case of Fraud XXXX Sole primary account holder dies. 
Note : Each authorized users privilege ends automatically upon the death of all of the primary cardmembers. '' per CB 's website. 

XXXX Authorized User privileges automatically end for this card. 

XXXX XXXX buys ten death certificates issued in the name of the sole primary account holder. 

XXXX through XXXX XXXX continues using Card. 
Note 1 : If any person uses the Card after the privilege ends, such use indicates his or her agreement to pay us, and we may, at our discretion, pursue the person for payment of any balance or charge resulting from his or her use of the Card. per CB 's website.

Note 2 : Credit card fraud is specifically defined in Chapter 638:5 of Title LXII of the Criminal Code of the State of New Hampshire ( NH ). Under this section, anyone who fraudulently uses a credit card to receive payments or any other kind of benefit in spite of his knowledge that the credit card was stolen, revoked or cancelled, and that he is not authorized to use that person 's payment device, commits credit card fraud. XXXX is a XXXX resident. 

XXXX through XXXX XXXX continues making regular payments on : XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX makes last monthly payment on Card XXXX XXXX makes last charge on Card XXXX XXXX files fraud claim for {$68.00} XXXX First CB correspondence ( email ) to estate executor, regarding fraudulent charges unpaid by XXXX. 
Note : No correspondence concerning this account/Card had previously been sent to estate executor prior to this date. Estate executor did not previously have Card account number. 

XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX debt collectors , mails first notice to The Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX mails second collection notice XXXX CB employee XXXX XXXX, of Fraud Dept, disputes representative, identifies case as fraud and spells out how it should be resolved within two weeks. Initiates process by entering orders into CB computer system.

Note : Fraud was committed because the former authorized user both used the credit card and paid some bills after the death of the sole primary account holder. 

XXXX and XXXX Follow-up calls reveal CB has deleted XXXX notes in CBs system. CB employees seem cowed and are reluctant to suggest a future path to resolution or are unable to help. CBs Claims Group has reversed the decision of fraud made by experienced disputes rep XXXX, and are now asserting that the Card charges were made by an authorized user. It was further asserted that CB reached out to estate executor to advise of this reversed decision. 
Note : No CB employee reached out to me to advise or explain reverse of decision from fraud to " authorized user. '' XXXX Police report filed in XXXX XXXX, NY XXXX Sent certified letter detailing fraud issues to CB Office of the Chairman XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in CBs Office of the Chairman, begins work on case. 
Note : She received my letter of XX/XX/XXXX referencing Police Report. 

XXXX Second collection agency engaged. XXXX XXXX mails first collection notice to XXXX XXXX, dated Sunday, XX/XX/XXXX. 
Note : Four days after XXXX XXXX begins work on case, a second notorious collection agency sends out a notice dated on a SUNDAY. Agency skipped step of researching proper estate designation. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX says still waiting for Claims Department to answer her inquiry Note : XXXX email suggested possible reasons for reversing the designation of fraud made on XX/XX/XXXX. The Claims Group avoided responding to prevent further documentation that their false assertions are contradicted by CBs own published service agreement shown on CBs website. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX emails Descendent Processing Group to pursue inquiry as no response is forthcoming from CBs Claims Department. 

Actions listed above only reinforce my suspicions that some CB employees are using the time, since my written inquiry of XX/XX/XXXX was received, to further suppress documentation in order to deny my fraud claim. The result of CBs lack of policy, or policy failure, has been misdirected, ongoing harassment, that is now bordering on malicious persecution. The timing of these actions appears more retaliatory than coincidental. These combined actions give strong consideration to the theory that this is about far more than a fraudulent {$2400.00} debt. Perhaps CB has a systemic problem and this is just the tip of the iceberg, requiring investigation by experts outside CBs influence. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX Executor of Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX, Citizens Bank Branch Manager-XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation