Consumer complaint received 2025-05-17 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: EML Payments USA, LLC
State: NE

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to appeal the denial of my previous chargeback claim Case # XXXX, regarding transactions with XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). While my previous communication outlined concerns regarding unauthorized transactions, I am now amending and primarily basing my dispute on the merchant 's significant misrepresentation of the services offered and their perpetration of a fraudulent scheme that directly induced the following transactions on my EML account : The following is a detailed list of the transactions I am disputing. The product descriptions on the purchase receipts are inconsistent and often vague, failing to clearly specify the exact nature of the purchase. Furthermore, a significant number of these transactions occurred on the same day, indicating a pattern of unusual and potentially unauthorized activity. 
XX/XX/year> XXXXXXXXXXXX  {$10.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$29.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX  {$99.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$290.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$290.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$290.00} ( Product : XXXX Low Balance Offer {$290.00}, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> - XXXX  - {$18.00} ( Product XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX XXXX  - {$190.00} ( Product XXXX XXXX  Deal {$190.00}, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$10.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$24.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXXl - {$24.00}, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX - {$190.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX Deal, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$79.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$180.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$190.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX Deal, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XXXX XXXX {$390.00} XX/XX/year>, XXXX PM " My decision to engage with and make purchases from XXXX was directly based on their explicit and implicit representations that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX could be redeemed for United States Dollars ( USD ). I contend that these XXXX XXXX were not merely a bonus, but a core component of the product I was purchasing. In effect, I was buying a virtual currency with a stated redeemable value, which was included with XXXX XXXX purchases. This is further complicated by the fact that other items like XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  were also part of the purchase but were neither included nor detailed on the receipts, leading to significant confusion about the exact contents of what I bought. Furthermore, XXXX failed to fulfill the full advertised product and explicitly state the promised amounts of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  at the time of purchase. These promised amounts were also supposed to be higher based on explicit marketing from VIP managers to purchase specific products, none of which dingdingding.com has honored. '' Please see attached receipts and product information. Also see marketing emails of packages and what was sold with those packages. 
This fundamental aspect of their service was clearly outlined in their own Terms and Conditions, dated XX/XX/year>. Specifically, Section 9 ( Redemption of Rewards ) stated : " YOU CAN REQUEST REDEMPTION OF ANY REWARDS BY SELECTING THE 'REDEEM ' BUTTON ON THE PLATFORM... WHERE YOU REDEEM REWARDS FOR CASH, SUCH REWARDS WILL BE PAID TO THE PAYMENT MEDIUM FROM WHICH YOU PURCHASED XXXX XXXX ... '' Furthermore, Section 7 ( c ) ( vii ) ( A ) ( Bonus Giveaways Redemption ) indicated the redeemable nature of the " Bonus Giveaways '' ( which functioned as the XXXX XXXX I received ) : " ( A ) unless we require otherwise ... any Bonus Giveaways allocated to you is only required to be played once before it is eligible to be redeemed as a Reward... '' These terms, in effect at the time of my transactions, contractually obligated dingdingding.com to provide a service that included the ability to redeem XXXX XXXX for cash. This understanding was further reinforced by direct communications from their representatives and their marketing materials. For example : Email from XXXX XXXX : In an email dated XX/XX/year>, VIP Manager XXXX XXXX assured me that redemptions were reliable and timely, directly influencing my decision to increase my purchases. ( Official copy attached ) Email from XXXX XXXX : VIP Manager XXXX XXXX 's welcome email highlighted the bonus XXXX XXXX offered with purchases, implying their inherent value and redeemability, and serving as a key factor in my initial engagement with the platform. ( Official copy attached ) Promotional Emails : XXXX consistently sent promotional emails advertising XXXX XXXX packages that included XXXX XXXX further emphasizing the link between purchases and acquiring these allegedly redeemable coins. Examples of these promotional emails, copies of which are attached, include offers like " XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$9.00}XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$18.00}XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$29.00}XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$46.00}, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX '' for {$990.00}. ( Official copies attached ) Despite these explicit terms and assurances, dingdingding.com ceased honoring XXXX XXXX redemptions around XX/XX/year>, effectively rendering the primary incentive for my purchases worthless. This unilateral change in their service represents a significant breach of the agreement in place when I made the aforementioned transactions. 
Moreover, I believe that XXXX 's actions extend beyond a simple breach of contract and constitute a fraudulent scheme. Reports indicate that the company was facing financial difficulties and, instead of honoring their obligations to customers, engaged in the following : Delaying and Stalling Payments : XXXX reportedly implemented tactics to delay and stall payments owed to customers, including requiring them to sign additional forms and creating artificial obstacles to the redemption process. 
Attempting a " Ponzi-like '' Scheme : Information suggests that XXXX attempted to use funds from new customers to pay off existing obligations, a practice akin to a Ponzi scheme. 
Inconsistent and Conflicting Terms of Service : XXXX has presented conflicting versions of their Terms of Service, further demonstrating a lack of transparency and an attempt to obscure their obligations. 
The Terms of Service dated XX/XX/year>, a copy of which is attached, clearly outlines the redemption of rewards for cash. 
The Terms of Service dated XX/XX/year>, a copy of which is also attached, also outlines the redemption of rewards for cash. 
I will also provide the Terms of Service dated XX/XX/year>, which I contend was the version in place when redemptions ceased, and which may reflect different terms. 
Furthermore, the current Terms of Service contain conflicting dates, stating " Updated XX/XX/year> '' at the top while stating " XX/XX/year> '' at the bottom, further eroding their credibility. 
Unresponsive Communication : XXXX has become unresponsive to customer inquiries. Their listed customer service phone number, XXXX, is no longer in service, and my numerous emails to their support address have gone unanswered. 
Pattern of Frequent and Vaguely Described Transactions : A review of my purchase history reveals a pattern of unusually frequent transactions, with multiple purchases often occurring on the same day, and vague product descriptions. This pattern, combined with the ambiguous nature of the purchase descriptions on the receipts ( e.g., " XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  '' instead of a clear explanation of what was purchased ), strongly suggests that I was not making informed and deliberate choices, but rather was being induced to spend large sums of money under unclear circumstances. My purchase history includes the following transactions : XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$10.00} ( Product XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$29.00} ( Product XXXX XXXX XXXXl XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX  {$99.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> dingdingding.com {$290.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$290.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXXXXXX  {$290.00} ( Product : XXXX Low Balance Offer {$290.00}, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> - XXXX  - {$18.00} ( Product XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX XXXX - {$190.00} ( Product XXXX XXXX Deal {$190.00}, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX  {$390.00} XX/XX/year>, XXXX PM Product : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Transaction ID : XXXX XX/XX/year> XXXX {$10.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX  XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$24.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX {$24.00}, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX - {$190.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year> XXXX {$79.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$180.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transaction ID : XXXX ) XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX {$190.00} ( Product : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Transaction ID : XXXX ) Changing Jurisdiction : XXXX has changed the XXXX listed in their Terms of Service. While earlier versions listed a XXXX address for processing transactions, a Delaware address was also used. This suggests an attempt to manipulate their legal jurisdiction and avoid accountability. 
These actions, combined with the cessation of XXXX XXXX redemptions, strongly suggest a deliberate effort to defraud customers. 
Therefore, I am formally disputing these charges based on " services not rendered as described '' and " fraudulent misrepresentation '' by dingdingding.com. The fundamental value proposition that led to these transactions the ability to redeem XXXX XXXX for cash, as explicitly stated in their Terms of Service was not honored. Furthermore, the merchant 's subsequent actions, including the changes to their Terms of Service and address, their failure to provide customer support, and their deceptive marketing practices, indicate a pattern of fraudulent behavior aimed at depriving customers of the value they were promised.

I request that EML thoroughly investigate this amended dispute, considering the attached Terms and Conditions, email correspondence, and the evidence of fraudulent activity, and initiate a full chargeback for the total amount of {$2700.00}. Dingdingding.com not only failed to provide the service as contractually agreed but also engaged in deceptive and fraudulent practices that directly harmed me financially. 
Thank you for your prompt attention to this critical matter.

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 non-monetary relief