Consumer complaint received 2026-01-23 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Problem with fees
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Dear CFPB, I am submitting a third complaint regarding Capital Ones repeated failure to meaningfully address the same unresolved issue : improper Cash Advance Fees charged on standard retail purchases, and Capital Ones pattern of providing irrelevant, misleading, and non-substantive responses to prior CFPB complaints. 

This complaint references my prior CFPB complaints, including case numbers XXXX and XXXX. 

-- - Procedural history and failures : 1. XXXX CFPB complaint ( Case # XXXX ) : I filed a complaint regarding improper Cash Advance Fees charged on standard XXXX retail purchases processed through XXXX. Capital Ones response was entirely irrelevant and stated that it was unable to increase my credit limit an issue I never requested and which had nothing to do with my complaint. CFPB closed the case based on this non-responsive answer. 

2. XXXX  CFPB complaint / review ( Case # XXXX ) : I submitted a detailed follow-up explaining the misclassification issue and providing transaction evidence. Capital One refused to refund the fees and issued a second formal letter claiming that the merchant processed the transactions as cash advances, citing its Customer Agreement and advising me to contact the merchant. Capital One failed to disclose the actual Merchant Category Code ( MCC ), ignored key facts, and mischaracterized retail XXXX purchases as cash-equivalent transactions. CFPB did not provide any substantive response to this review. 

The issue therefore remains unresolved after XXXX CFPB complaint cycles and XXXX defective company responses. 

-- - Underlying issue : Improper Cash Advance Fees Capital One charged XXXX ( XXXX ) Cash Advance Fees on XXXX XXXX purchases, totaling {$25.00} ( {$5.00} per transaction ). These were standard online retail purchases of physical goods, processed by XXXX as merchant transactions. 

Prior to this issue, on XX/XX/XXXX, I made an identical AliExpress purchase through XXXX using the same Capital One card, and no Cash Advance Fee was applied. Between XX/XX/year>, Capital One began classifying identical retail purchases as cash advances, despite no change in my purchasing behavior, merchant, or transaction structure. This clearly indicates a transaction routing or MCC misclassification error. 

All XXXX transactions show : - Merchant : XXXX / XXXX - Category : Other Services/ Online Merchant - Improper {$5.00} Cash Advance Fee applied to each transaction These transactions were not : - Cash withdrawals- Peer-to-peer transfers - Wallet funding - Money orders- Foreign currency or travelers checks - Gambling, gaming, or lottery purchases- Wire transfers- Or any other cash-equivalent activity They were ordinary retail purchases of physical goods. 

-- - Defects in Capital Ones responses : Capital Ones second formal response ( dated XX/XX/year> ) claims : Our records indicate the merchant processed each transaction as a cash advance Capital One is unable to alter the Merchant Classification Code assigned at point of sale. 

This response is materially defective for the following reasons : 1. Failure to disclose XXXX : Capital One refused to identify the actual XXXX used for these transactions, despite my explicit request. This prevents independent verification of whether the transactions were legitimately classified as cash advances. 

2. Ignoring the XX/XX/XXXX control transaction : Capital One provided no explanation for why the same merchant, same processor ( XXXX ), and same purchase type was not treated as a cash advance on XX/XX/XXXX, but suddenly was between XX/XX/year>. 

3. Misrepresentation of XXXX transactions : Capital One misleadingly stated that transactions using XXXX may be considered cash equivalents, without distinguishing between : - XXXX peer-to-peer transfers or wallet funding, and - XXXX retail merchant checkout transactions. 

4. Improper deflection to the merchant : Capital One improperly shifted responsibility to XXXX, despite having the ability to : - issue a goodwill credit, - initiate a network misclassification review, or - escalate the transaction routing error through XXXX XXXX 

5. Pattern of non-substantive responses : Capital One has now provided XXXX CFPB responses that failed to address the substance of the complaint : - the first entirely irrelevant ( credit limit increase ), - the second misleading, incomplete, and evasive. 

-- - Consumer protection and reasonable expectations : As a consumer, I should not be financially penalized for internal payment-routing or processing changes between a merchant ( XXXX ) and a payment processor ( XXXX ). I used XXXX intentionally as a security and consumer-protection measure to avoid directly sharing my credit card number with a foreign merchant and to benefit from XXXX dispute and fraud-protection layer. 

I had used the same XXXX payment method many times before without any Cash Advance Fees, including a control transaction on XX/XX/XXXX. I did not engage in any high-risk, cash-equivalent, or wallet-funding activity. I simply purchased physical goods through a standard online checkout. 

Penalizing a consumer with cash advance fees due to backend routing changes or misclassification by a merchant or processor constitutes an unfair billing practice and violates reasonable consumer expectations. I should not bear financial responsibility for internal technical or contractual changes between third-party payment networks. 

-- - Regulatory and network context : XXXX and XXXX rules require that transaction classification be determined by the Merchant Category Code ( MCC ) and merchant descriptor. The use of a payment processor such as XXXX does not convert a retail merchant purchase into a cash advance. 

This issue was widespread during the XXXX XXXX shopping period and affected multiple banks due to temporary payment-routing changes between XXXX and XXXX. Despite these routing changes, the transactions remained retail purchases and should not have been treated as cash advances. 

Misclassifying retail transactions as cash advances results in improper fees, higher APR charges, and constitutes an unfair and inaccurate billing practice. 

-- - Requested resolution : I respectfully request : 1. Full reversal of all XXXX improperly charged Cash Advance Fees ( {$25.00} total ) 2. Reversal of any associated cash-advance interest, if applied 3. A written explanation identifying the XXXX assigned to each transaction and the justification for classifying retail purchases as cash advances 4. CFPB acknowledgment that Capital Ones prior CFPB responses were irrelevant, misleading, and non-substantive 5. Regulatory review of Capital Ones cash advance classification and MCC handling procedures to prevent systemic misclassification This complaint is being submitted due to Capital Ones repeated failure to address the issue after XXXX CFPB complaint cycles and XXXX defective company responses. 

Thank you for your attention to this matter. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation