Consumer complaint received 2026-06-12 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
Transaction Details : Date of Transaction : XX/XX/year> Amount : {$290.00} USD Merchant : XXXX XXXX * XXXX INTERNET CA Citi Dispute Reference ID : XXXX Credit Card : XXXX XXXX The Core Issue ( Violation of " Date of Discovery '' and Hidden Defect ) : Citibank summarily denied my claim under the generic premise that they " were not contacted in a timely manner '' based solely on the XXXX transaction date. In doing so, Citibank 's automated system completely ignored federal regulations ( FCBA ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding Hidden Defects ( Latent Defects ) and Triangulation Fraud. The item purchased was a XXXX XXXX XXXX machine Model XXXX. The product functioned normally upon delivery, and usage the following couple of months, making it physically and technically impossible for me to detect any fraud at that time before the timeframe window. However, on XX/XX/year>, the manufacturer ( XXXX ) executed a remote hardware block on the machine. When I contacted XXXX, they officially confirmed that this specific serial number was flagged and permanently deactivated because it was purchased via an illegal XXXX XXXX XXXX ( active dispute ) scheme executed by the XXXX seller. Per payment network regulations, the XXXX legal timeframe for a dispute involving a hidden defect or fraud strictly begins on the Date of XXXX, which was XX/XX/year>, the day I was no longer able to use the machine because it was blocked when it connected online. I reported this to Citibank on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX days after discovery and after trying with merchant and XXXX firstputting my claim flawlessly within the legal timeframe. Merchant Recourse and Documentation : The seller has completely abandoned the XXXX platform. I contacted XXXX customer service, and they explicitly stated that while they recognize the merchant fraud, it falls outside their automated XXXX Money Back Guarantee window. XXXX customer support instructed me in writing to file a chargeback with my financial institution, stating literally : " you may try to contact your bank and they know what to do next. '' Despite my efforts to cooperate, Citibank 's Tier 1 agents refused to open a secure upload link to review my official PDFs during my calls, and their automated system rejected the claim without a human analyst evaluating the evidence. I have a comprehensive evidence file including : 1. The official XXXX manufacturer fraud notice. 2. A certified CheckMEND law enforcement/theft report. XXXX. Full chat transcripts from XXXX support directing me to my bank. 4. Copy of XXXX order 5. Statement from bank ignoring the date of discovery and solely base the dispute on purchase date 6. Copy of message to the Seller, never answered back because no longer in the platform Citibank can not hide behind an automated expiration timeline when a consumer is a victim of fraud because an invisible, manufacturer-verified hardware block. I demand an immediate human re-evaluation of this case by the Executive Office. Thanks

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