Consumer complaint received 2025-10-28 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NH

Complaint narrative:
Duplicate charge The vendor was using a mobile cell phone based credit card processing system among a crowd of tens of thousands of people at an airshow on XX/XX/XXXX. 

The cell phone system was overwhelmed as thousands of people were waiting in lines and having their cards swiped multiple times because of the delays in the system. 

Attached are two news stories and screenshots discussing the abrupt end to the airshow at XXXX due to SEVERE weather. The show concluded merely 15 minutes after takeoff occurred at XXXX. Not just rain, but lightning strikes and hail at the airport. It was not safe to remain at the airport. These news stories and screenshots demonstrate that the show ended at XXXX, and that the entire crowd was told to leave immediately. 

The legitimate charge of {$200.00} took place at XXXX. The vendor was not able to give me a receipt ( paper, electronically, or otherwise ) because they believed the charge did not happen due to cell phone system congestion. 

The DUPLICATE charge took place at XXXX, after the cell phone congestion was over, and the vendors duplicated charges that they thought didn't go through. The XXXX charge was made well after everyone left and the cell phone congestion was alleviated. 

That charge was sent through when my family and I, and my credit card, had already left. No customers were at the airshow at this time. The vendor was not making chicken tenders at XXXX, in the rain and lightning, two hours after everyone was ordered to leave. The show was actually scheduled to end at XXXX and the vendors would have shut down long before XXXX under NORMAL circumstances. 

The duplicate charge was made after the vendor was closed, and was attempting to reconcile the days charges, and re-sending charges that they believed did not go through. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED! 

CITI 'resolved " the dispute after the vendor sent 'proof ' of the duplicate charge which only reinforces my argument that the vendor deliberately charged me a second time after the show was over. 

A letter dated XX/XX/XXXX on my account from CITI states... 
" We may be able to assist you if you provide us with a documentation showing the merchant agreed to credit your account. If you are unable to provide this, you will need to seek other means to obtain credit. '' The 'vendor ' was a pop up vendor using a cell phone transaction system. It no longer exists in the location the purchase was made. I have no contact information for the vendor. CITI has not provided contact information for the vendor. A web search for the vendor name that appears on the statements ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) shows no results! I have no receipt from the vendor. I have no way of communicating with the vendor! 

CITI has redacted the contact information for the vendor in all letters. The 'proof ' from the vendor sent to me on XX/XX/XXXX starts on page 2 of 6. The first page is redacted. 

The vendor is deliberately being shielded by Citi so that customers can not communicate and dispute charges. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX

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 monetary relief