Consumer complaint received 2026-05-18 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Application denied
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
On Friday, XX/XX/year>, I applied for the Capital One Business Spark XXXX XXXX based on an advertised promotional offer of {$2000.00} cash back after {$30000.00} in spend in the first XXXX months. My application listed {$300000.00} annual business income/revenue, projected monthly card spend of up to ~ {$35000.00}, and an XXXX FICO score. I am a long-standing Capital One personal-card customer in excellent standing. I disclose that I have recently opened several other credit cards with non-Capital One issuers ; even so, my file was strong enough that Capital One did approve one offer during this same session ( see below ), so the underwriting was not the problem the application-path handling was. The application returned an approval but at lower terms than advertised : approximately a {$10000.00} credit line with a {$1000.00} cash-back bonus on {$10000.00} in spend, not the $ XXXX {$2000.00} product I had selected. I called Capital One. The representative advised me to accept the approval and stated that Capital One would work with me to convert the account to the advertised terms. Following that guidance, I attempted to proceed via the website. The site returned an error and instructed me to " try again later. '' I retried as instructed. The same error reappeared. I subsequently realized the $ XXXX {$2000.00} promotion was tied specifically to the Spark XXXX XXXX product, not Spark Cash, and I applied directly for Spark XXXX XXXX. That application returned a different product entirely a Spark business card with no promotional incentive. I declined. I then attempted to return to the original $ XXXX {$1000.00} approval to at least retain that. I was denied outright. Capital One issued a written Adverse Action Letter dated XX/XX/year> ( Request ID XXXX, Creditor : Capital One N.A. ) citing " too many recent inquiries '' as the reason. Notably, that same letter states the form " was not a credit card application '' and " your XXXX XXXX was not affected, '' indicating Capital One classified at least part of this activity as a prequalification check rather than a full application. On Monday, XX/XX/year>, I called Capital One ( XXXX ) and spoke with supervisor XXXX, representative ID XXXX. XXXX confirmed the denial was generated by an automated decisioning system and stated she could not reverse it. She advised that the XXXX department does not perform manual reviews on her referral and stated that nothing further could be done. The unfair-process pattern : Capital One advertised a $ XXXX $ XXXX product. I attempted to apply for that product. Capital One 's own application pathway and call-center guidance routed me through a sequence that ( 1 ) substituted a lower-tier offer for the advertised product, ( 2 ) instructed me to retry after Capital One-side errors, ( 3 ) presented an unrelated third product when I correctly selected Spark XXXX XXXX, and ( 4 ) issued an automated denial citing inquiry volume inquiry volume that was at minimum exacerbated by Capital One 's own retry instructions XXXX and which Capital One 's own letter acknowledges may not even have generated hard pulls. An XXXX existing customer with $ XXXX stated income, who Capital One was willing to approve at the start of this same session, should not be funneled through that pathway and then told no human at Capital One has authority to review the file. In parallel with this complaint, I have today sent a written escalation to the Capital One Executive Office requesting manual underwriting review and approval at the advertised terms. I am requesting CFPB 's assistance in ensuring that escalation receives a substantive response within a reasonable timeframe.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation