Consumer complaint received 2025-11-18 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Trouble using your card — Credit card company won't increase or decrease your credit limit
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Synchrony Bank, issuer of the PayPal Cashback Mastercard, regarding an unfair and extreme credit-limit reduction that occurred shortly after I paid my account in full, as well as the companys failure to provide an adequate explanation despite a XXXX complaint. 

Account : PayPal Cashback Mastercard Original Credit Limit : {$2800.00} New Credit Limit : {$160.00} XXXX  Case ID : XXXX What Happened On XX/XX/year>2025, I paid my PayPal Cashback Mastercard balance in full in the amount of {$2600.00}. My account was in good standing, with no late payments, no delinquencies, and a strong history of responsible usage. 

On XX/XX/scrub> 2025, less than XXXX weeks after paying the account to {$0.00}, Synchrony Bank reduced my credit limit from {$2800.00} to {$160.00} without prior notice. This was a 94 % reduction and caused an immediate and unnecessary spike in my credit utilization ratio, negatively affecting my credit score. 

I received an adverse action letter, but the reasons listed were vague, generic, and not tied to my actual account performance. Synchrony has not explained why a major limit reduction was taken immediately after a full payoff, nor why a customer with perfect payment history was treated as high risk. 

XXXX  Complaint and Synchronys Response I filed a XXXX complaint ( Case # XXXX ). Synchrony responded with a template letter claiming the decision was based on my XXXX credit file but did not provide : Any specific adverse action reason cXXXXes Any actual explanation of risk Any connection between the negative action and my perfect account history Any acknowledgment of the timing of the reduction They also repeatedly redirected me to XXXX, even though XXXX does not make credit decisions, which misrepresents the nature of adverse action and fails to meet transparency requirements under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ). 

The XXXX  closed the case as Answered consumer remains dissatisfied. 

Synchrony still did not address : Why the reduction happened immediately after a full payoff Why my perfect history was ignored Why such an extreme reduction ( to {$160.00} ) was necessary Why no individualized explanation was provided How the action was justified under risk-based evaluation Harm Synchronys action has caused measurable harm : An immediate and significant increase in my credit utilization ratio A negative impact on my credit score Loss of available credit The appearance of retaliation for paying off the account Lack of transparency in credit decision-making This appears to be part of a pattern of aggressive portfolio tightening that disproportionately affects responsible long-term consumers. 

Requested Resolution I am requesting : Reinstatement or reasonable increase of my credit limit based on my actual history of timely payments and responsible account management. 

Correction of any negative credit reporting resulting from this drastic limit reduction. 

A full and individualized written explanation of the factors used to justify the reduction, including XXXXrequired adverse action reason cXXXXes. 

Review of Synchrony Banks credit-limit reduction practices for transparency and fairness.

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 explanation