Consumer complaint received 2025-09-24 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: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: UT

Complaint narrative:
XXXX : Capital One denied chargeback for hotel stay with no running water ; XXXX refused full refund ( merchant-of-record shield misapplied ). 

One-line summary : Property failed to deliver essential advertised services ( running water ) ; Booking.com and Capital One denied remedy, contrary to Visa Rule XXXX, the Fair Credit Billing Act, and FTC Act protections. 

Complaint : I dispute a XXXX ( {$300.00} ) charge for a Booking.com reservation ( Reservation # XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ) for July 812, 2025. The property lost all running water during my stay, making the private bathroom, shower, and toilet unusable a complete failure of the services advertised. I reported the outage immediately, waited in good faith for restoration, and ultimately was forced to relocate on XX/XX/year>. 
Both Booking.com and the property indirectly acknowledged the outage : The property offered only a partial refund. 
XXXX offered a XXXX refund. 
The propertys public reply to my review explicitly referenced a water outage and refund discussions. 
Despite this, XXXX refused to issue a full refund, pointing me back to the property. Capital One initially granted provisional credit but later reversed it, stating on the phone that the charge was not reversible because XXXX was the merchant of record and no cancellation per policy was received. This response addressed cancellation and payment mechanics instead of whether services were delivered as described. 

Regulatory basis : XXXX XXXX Rules, Section XXXX ( Services Not as Described ) : Cardholders may dispute charges when services are materially different from those described. Visa guidance makes clear : the merchant of record is considered the liable party/point of contact for resolution never refer the cardholder to the manufacturer [ the property ]. Booking.com, as merchant of record, failed to meet this obligation.

Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) : Protects cardholders from liability for services not delivered as agreed. Capital Ones denial contradicted this standard by deferring to cancellation policies instead of service delivery.

FTC Act 5 and state UDAP statutes : Advertising accommodations with non-functional, essential amenities ( bathroom, shower, toilet ) is a deceptive and unfair practice.

Procedural failure by Capital One : Capital One also failed to comply with 12 CFR 1026.13 ( f ) ( 1 ) ( Regulation Z ). When denying a billing error, the creditor must provide an explanation setting forth the reasons for its determination. Capital Ones letters did not do this. One referenced no cancellation per policy, which is irrelevant to a services-not-as-described claim. Subsequent letters said only that my documentation was lacking the requested information without identifying what information was missing. These vague responses did not satisfy Reg Z requirements, leaving me unable to understand or address their basis for denial.

Evidence submitted : 1. Booking confirmation/invoice showing advertised amenities ( bathroom, shower, toilet ) with tender receipt proving charge ( 259.20 / {$300.00} ). 
2. Exhibit packet submitted to Capital One ( XX/XX/year> ) : XXXX XXXX records showing outage reports and property/Booking responses ; propertys public reply acknowledging a water outage and refund discussions. 
XXXX. Correspondence from Capital One ( initial provisional credit, later denial ). 
XXXX. Final letter to Capital One substantiating claim.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief