Consumer complaint received 2026-03-09 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: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Truist Bank Issue : Credit Card Dispute Failure to Render Services / Breach of Refund Guarantee Financial Institution : Truist Bank Case Number : XXXX Client Advocacy Case : XXXX Complaint Narrative I am filing this complaint regarding Truist Banks handling of my credit card dispute involving a merchant called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX from whom I purchased consulting services intended to secure business funding. On XX/XX/year>, I entered into a written agreement with XXXX XXXX XXXX and paid {$5500.00} upfront for consulting services intended to assist in obtaining business credit funding. The written agreement explicitly states that if funding is not secured, the client will be refunded in full. The contract states : Client agrees to pay XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX dollars ( {$5500.00} ) up front If there is failure to secure funding ; the client will be refunded in full for their investment. Despite this guarantee, no funding was ever secured and the promised services were never delivered. Over the following months I maintained ongoing communication with the company through XXXX channels, text messages, and other communications requesting updates on funding progress. The company repeatedly assured me they were working on the process but ultimately failed to deliver any funding or meaningful services. Eventually the company stopped responding and appears to have ceased operations entirely. As a result, the refund guarantee in the contract was triggered, yet no refund was ever issued. Because the merchant failed to deliver the promised services and did not honor the refund guarantee, I filed a dispute with Truist. However, Truist denied the dispute and maintained that it could not proceed because the dispute was not filed within 60 days of the original transaction date. This reasoning ignores the nature of the dispute. The issue is not the validity of the original transaction, but rather the merchants failure to perform services and failure to honor a contractual refund guarantee once those services failed. The service purchased was ongoing consulting services intended to secure funding over time, not a one-time product delivered on the transaction date. The dispute should therefore be evaluated based on : Failure to render services Breach of a written refund guarantee Merchant non-responsiveness / apparent closure By focusing only on the transaction date and ignoring the contract and timeline of non-performance, Truist failed to conduct a reasonable investigation into the dispute. I provided documentation including : The signed contract showing the refund guarantee Screenshots and transcripts of communications with the merchant Evidence of repeated attempts to resolve the matter Evidence that no funding was ever obtained Despite this documentation, Truist maintained its denial solely based on the XXXX rule tied to the original transaction. I am requesting that Truist be required to conduct a proper investigation into the failure to deliver services and breach of the refund guarantee, rather than relying solely on the transaction date. The merchant has not delivered the services promised, has not issued the contractually required refund, and is now non-responsive. I am requesting regulatory review of Truists investigation and reconsideration of the chargeback under the appropriate standard for services not rendered and breach of contract. Desired Resolution I request that Truist : 1. Reopen the investigation into this dispute. 2. Evaluate the dispute based on failure to render services and breach of refund guarantee, not solely the original transaction date. 3. Process the chargeback for the {$5500.00} payment made to XXXX XXXX XXXX. Documents Attached Signed contract with refund guarantee Communication transcripts and screenshots Timeline of communications and non-performance Evidence of merchant non-responsiveness / closure

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