Consumer complaint received 2026-04-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit 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: Atlanticus Services Corporation
State: SC

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I was enrolled in financing for XXXX home security services through XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of sale. The financing was presented to me as part of the XXXX purchase and service setup. Based on how it was described, it appeared to be a simple 0 % interest, fixed-payment financing plan tied to the XXXX transaction. At no point during the sales process was it clearly explained that : the account would be treated as a revolving credit account or credit card, it would be reported to credit bureaus like a credit card, it could negatively affect my credit utilization, or different legal terms would apply than for a standard installment financing plan. I was not given a meaningful opportunity to review the full credit agreement before being required to apply. The financing was presented as part of the service activation process and felt mandatory in order to proceed. Account structure confusion and misrepresentation After reviewing my statements and agreement, I discovered that the account is labeled XXXX XXXX MO EQUAL PAY, lists a 0.00 % APR, and appears to function like a fixed-term financing plan with a declining balance and no interest charges. However, the agreement also states that the creditor elected to treat the account under revolving credit statutes. This created a mismatch between how the account was presented and how it was actually treated and reported. It was presented as fixed payment financing but enforced and reported as revolving credit. That distinction was not clearly explained to me, and I believe it was misleading. Attempt to dispute XXXX-related charges in XXXX In XXXX, after experiencing ongoing issues with the XXXX system and services, I contacted XXXX to dispute charges related to the defective or non-functioning services. During that call, I attempted to raise a dispute regarding the underlying service problems, but the XXXX representative did not properly process the dispute, did not give me a meaningful opportunity to escalate it, and did not formally document the issue as I requested. As a result, I was prevented from effectively exercising my rights as a consumer to dispute charges tied to defective services. Billing issues and improper fee handling XXXX Payments due date is on the XXXX of every month, In XX/XX/XXXX, the debit card on file expired at the end of the month, due to this the automatic payment didn't come out of my account the card expiration was on XXXX. A late fee of {$41.00} was then charged to the account. That same late fee was later credited or reversed in XX/XX/XXXX, but it was then reposted again on or about XX/XX/XXXX, without any clear explanation and without a new missed payment event being clearly identified. This sequence reflects inconsistent fee handling, lack of transparency, and charges being added, removed, and added back again without adequate justification. Credit reporting concerns XXXX has reported this account as a revolving credit account even though it functioned as a fixed-term financing arrangement tied to a single merchant transaction. This reporting has artificially affected my credit utilization, contributed to significant XXXX XXXX harm, and continued while the account and underlying charges were disputed. I believe the reporting does not accurately reflect the true nature of the account. Additional sales and disclosure concerns The consent and application process also appeared bundled and compressed. Multiple authorizations, including electronic disclosures, application disclosures, cardholder agreement terms, automatic payment authorization, and communications consent, were presented together in a way that did not allow for meaningful informed consent. Auto-pay was described as optional, but it was embedded in the application flow in a manner that made it appear part of the required process. In addition, when the XXXX system failed almost immediately after installation, I communicated with the XXXX salesperson and asked about the trial period because the system was not working properly within the first XXXX hours. I was told the trial period would be extended, but there was no formal documentation reflecting that extension. I relied on those representations. This is important because the system problems began almost immediately after installation, yet the financing had already been locked in before I had a fair opportunity to evaluate whether the system was working properly. Why this is a problem I believe XXXX engaged in : misrepresentation or lack of clear disclosure at the time of sale, failure to clearly disclose the true account type and legal treatment, inconsistent and unfair billing practices, failure to properly handle disputes, and inaccurate or misleading credit reporting. These actions caused financial harm, confusion, time loss, and damage to my credit.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation