Consumer complaint received 2018-11-27 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/18 I was debited for {$300.00} by Merchant. I had purchased a vehicle from them prior to this debit. Once I notice the debit I contacted the merchant and was given the run around on who can help me. I called my bank ( Chase Bank ) to file a dispute of unauthorized transaction. The asked me a series of questions, from memory it was : Did I do business with this merchant in the past? ( I answered Yes ) ; Is this charge from a previous purchase? ( I answered No ) ; Is the card in your possession? ( I answered Yes ). 
Claim was filed on XX/XX/18. 
I received provisional credit of the {$300.00} shortly after. 
Mid XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter stating they have resolved my dispute and have obtain documents from the merchant that led them to believe this transaction was authorized. The letter stated, date of debit will be on or after XX/XX/18. I called on XX/XX/18 extremely upset and stated what's going on. They stated they received documents and therefore are debiting the account. I told them they shouldn't be debiting my account, I did do business with them in the past but it wasn't related to this transaction. The letter did provided documents that were relied on to make this determination, nor did the letter state I may request documents relied on. According to reg e 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ). 

Additionally, on XX/XX/18 when I called and stated this is not correct and provided proof that this transaction was unauthorized the bank rep stated that they originally filed this dispute as a Fraud Claim not a dispute claim. So because of the new information I provided, they stated to be on XX/XX/18 via phone calls that should be recorded that my account will not be debited {$300.00} ( reversal of the credit ) and will be investigated under the dispute process. 

On XX/XX/18, I was debited for {$300.00}. Again, this violates regulation E on so many different levels. First based on verbal communication on XX/XX/18, I was told I would not be debited and research will be reviewed. Since I was debited on XX/XX/18 this is in direct conflict of Reg E 1005.11 ( d ) ( 2 ) ( iii ) - They should have provided notification and given an additional 5 days notice from that notice when the acct will be debited. Or there could be another issue because if they are stating XX/XX/18 is day 1 of the investigation, they should provided that resolution within 10 business days or leave the provisional credit on the account. Since the original claim was filed on XX/XX/18 and they debited the acct on XX/XX/18, to me it appears they were up against a timeframe they had to close out this claim. 

When I called on XX/XX/18 to reassert the error, the rep rudely and I hope you can pull these calls continued to repeat himself that the phones are recorded. After I couldn't get anywhere, I spoke with supervisor who stated because I answered the question ( Was this charged related to previous purchase? Answered No ) they said that made this claim to be filed under fraud and not dispute. 

I stated when I called in to file dispute, I answered the question correctly. To my knowledge I already paid the merchant, this could not be part of a previous purchase. How am I suppose to understand the banks reasoning on how they file their dispute claims. To me this is a huge gap in their process and should be investigated. 

I continually tried to defend myself and even though the supervisor agreed with my understanding he said because the way it was filed the bank can only go back VISA or the Merchant once and once that is final that's it. But I told him because of their process I am not being penalized for the Banks procedures. 

This is seriously unacceptable, I also asked for call back from a Director and he had to put in a request. I told him I wanted to file a complaint as well.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation