Consumer complaint received 2026-04-29 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: Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns Comenity Bank / Bread Financials deficient and inconsistent response to a previously filed CFPB complaint ( No. XXXX ) regarding a documented identity-theft fraud claim involving my XXXX XXXX XXXX account . The initial fraud dispute was filed on XX/XX/XXXX, and is supported by an XXXX XXXX Police Report ( No. XXXX ) and an active FBI investigation ( Case No. XXXX ). Despite the duration of this matter, no fraud investigation case number, reference identifier, or investigation file was ever assigned or provided, and no documented determination has been issued. The absence of any traceable investigation record over an extended period confirms that no verifiable investigation was conducted. This failure reflects a breakdown in required dispute handling and fraud investigation procedures. In XX/XX/XXXX, the company issued a credit of {$9700.00}, resulting in a negative account balance, which constitutes recognition of the disputed nature of the underlying transactions. That credit was subsequently reversed without explanation, documentation, or investigative findings. The reversal of a previously issued credit without any investigation record establishes a financial obligation that remains outstanding. Following this, the company continued billing activity and later issued a formal denial of the fraud claim, stating that no basis for fraud existed. This position directly contradicts its prior issuance of a substantial credit and has never been reconciled. In its CFPB response, the company claimed that {$12000.00} in credits had been issued ; however, account records reflect only approximately {$8800.00}. No itemized accounting or reconciliation has been provided to explain this discrepancy. Additionally, in prior correspondence dated XX/XX/XXXX, the companys legal counsel represented that several XXXX dollars in interest has been waived, yet no such credits were reflected in account statements or accessible records, and account access was subsequently restricted. This constitutes a material inconsistency between written representations and actual account treatment. Further, in a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, the companys legal counsel acknowledged a disputed balance of {$8600.00} and proposed conditional resolution terms, while simultaneously indicating that failure to accept those terms could result in continued reporting of the account as overdue and potential delinquency reporting. In that same correspondence, the company stated that it would consider further review in good faith upon receipt of additional information. This position is inconsistent with the companys prior conduct, as it has already been provided with extensive documentation, including law-enforcement records and supporting evidence, and has had ample opportunity over an extended period to conduct a proper investigation. The continued reference to future good faith review underscores the absence of any completed or verifiable investigation to date. The companys conduct demonstrates a pattern of inconsistent and unsupported financial representations, including : - issuance and reversal of credits without documentation, - denial of fraud despite prior credit recognition, - claims of additional credits not reflected in records, - and the absence of any formal investigation record or case number. This matter has been ongoing from early XX/XX/XXXX through late XX/XX/XXXX and reflects systemic deficiencies in dispute handling and account reconciliation practices.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation