Consumer complaint received 2026-01-08 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: AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
CFPB ESCALATION COMPLAINT Respondent : American Express Product : XXXX  Charge Card ( Account ending XXXX ) CFPB Issue Categories : Adverse action without adequate explanation Improper denial of dispute/appeal rights Inconsistent and misleading communications Potential automated decision-making without disclosure Unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices ( UDAAP ) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ( for CFPB Intake & Supervisory Staff ) American Express imposed a {$3600.00} spending limit on my historically unlimited XXXX  charge card, failed to provide a meaningful adverse-action explanation, and then improperly denied my right to appeal despite my written complaint being submitted within the stated XXXX window. 

American Expresss own Executive Customer Care letter instructed me to appeal through a specific department and phone number ; when I followed those instructions, the referenced department disclaimed authority and informed me that the appeal window had expired. This sequence reflects procedural obstruction, misdirection, and denial of review, raising concerns under ECOA/Regulation B and CFPB UDAAP standards.

FACTUAL TIMELINE ( DOCUMENTED ) 1. Adverse Action and Timely Notice XXXX : American Express identifies this date as triggering a XXXX dispute/appeal period. 

XXXX : I submitted a written complaint disputing the newly imposed {$3600.00} limit and requesting review. This submission was within the XXXX window. 

Accounts were current and paid in full. 

No delinquency, default, or adverse credit event existed at the time.

2. Delayed Executive Response Without Explanation XXXX : American Express Executive Customer Care responded in writing. 

The response : Acknowledged a careful and complete review Did not identify any specific risk factors Did not explain why a {$3600.00} limit was imposed Did not disclose whether the decision was made by a human reviewer or an automated system The letter explicitly instructed me to appeal by contacting the Responsible Lending Action Team at XXXX. 

3. Appeal Denied Despite Timely Complaint XXXX : I was told by American Express that the appeal window had expired, despite my XXXX written complaint being timely. 

XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX XXXX : I contacted the Responsible Lending Action Team at the number provided in the Executive Customer Care letter. 

The representative ( XXXX XXXX stated : Her department does not handle appeals Suggested the credit limit department might be responsible After consulting that department, I was told : The appeal window had expired No appeal could be opened American Express thus directed me to a department that disclaimed authority, while simultaneously asserting that the appeal period had expired a contradiction that effectively denied review. 

FAILURE TO PROVIDE A LEGALLY SUFFICIENT ADVERSE-ACTION EXPLANATION American Express has never provided : The specific reasons for the {$3600.00} limit The factors considered Any explanation that would allow me to understand or contest the decision Disclosure of whether the decision was : Generated by an automated or AI-based system Or reviewed by a human underwriter Generic statements such as careful and complete review do not constitute a meaningful explanation. 

CREDIT REPORTING AND CONSUMER IMPACT CONCERNS Credit bureaus ( including XXXX  ) do not report any {$3600.00} credit limit My total available credit remains {$160000.00} The imposed limit appears to exist only internally, raising concerns that : Internal risk modeling may be affecting my credit profile Without transparency or consistent reporting Additionally, my credit score declined from XXXX to XXXX shortly after paying off a {$12000.00} American Express personal loan, suggesting possible algorithmic misclassification rather than risk behavior. 

PATTERN OF PROCEDURAL DEFECTS ( SUPERVISORY ISSUE ) American Express has : Accepted a timely written complaint Delayed its response until near the end of the appeal period Asserted that the appeal window expired despite timely notice Directed me to a department that denied authority Failed to identify any department empowered to hear an appeal Failed to provide a specific adverse-action explanation This pattern creates a procedural dead end and appears inconsistent with fair dispute-handling obligations. 

REGULATORY CONCERNS RAISED This matter raises concerns regarding : ECOA / Regulation B failure to provide a meaningful adverse-action explanation UDAAP misleading instructions, procedural obstruction, and denial of review Automated decision-making governance lack of transparency regarding AI or algorithmic determinations Dispute-handling practices denial of appeal despite timely notice RELIEF REQUESTED I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : Require American Express to reopen the appeal based on timely notice Require a written, specific adverse-action explanation Require disclosure of whether the decision was automated or human-reviewed Require correction of any unsupported internal risk classifications Review American Expresss appeal-window and departmental misdirection practices for compliance WHY THIS WARRANTS ESCALATION Timely notice is undisputed American Expresss own written instructions were followed Appeal rights were denied through misdirection No meaningful explanation has ever been provided Potential systemic issue affecting charge-card customers

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation