Consumer complaint received 2026-05-14 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Trouble using your card — Can't use card to make purchases
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, IL XXXX Wenesday, XX/XX/year> To Whom It May Concern : RE : Complaint Regarding Automated Credit Card Payment Holds Following Verified ACH Withdrawal of Funds I am submitting this complaint regarding potentially unfair and inconsistent payment-hold practices involving large electronic credit-card payments withdrawn from verified consumer bank accounts but not promptly restored to available credit. Attached as supporting documentation is a mini-statement from my financial institution, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, reflecting the underlying account activity associated with these transactions. The attached records show : loan advances deposited into my established checking account, successful ACH withdrawals by the credit-card issuers, and the corresponding transfer activity during the relevant time period. During the same general timeframe, I made several substantial electronic payments from the same long-established checking account that I have successfully used for years. One payment of approximately {$8000.00} made toward a Visa Signature account with an {$11000.00} credit limit was processed normally and the corresponding available credit was restored the following business day. However, substantially similar payments involving : approximately {$4000.00} to the XXXX XXXX XXXX associated with XXXX XXXX ; and approximately {$5000.00} to Citibank were subjected to extended payment holds despite the funds already having been withdrawn from my bank account. In both cases : the ACH payments were successfully initiated, the funds were removed from my checking account, the payments originated from a long-established verified bank account, and there were no fraud alerts reported by my financial institution. I contacted my bank directly and was informed that no fraud flags or suspicious activity indicators existed on my account in connection with these transactions. I subsequently contacted both credit-card issuers multiple times and escalated the matter to supervisory personnel. During those conversations, I was informed that the transactions had been automatically flagged because of the payment amounts involved and that the restrictions were system generated. When I requested a specific explanation regarding : what factual basis triggered the alleged fraud concern, what particular risk indicators were identified, and whether any meaningful human review had occurred, I did not receive a clear or substantive explanation beyond generalized references to automated system controls. I further offered to provide direct proof from my bank confirming successful ACH settlement and availability of funds. I also offered to transfer additional funds to further secure the account balances. I was informed that additional payments would likely be subjected to the same automated restrictions. This raises significant concerns regarding : the transparency of these automated payment-hold systems, the absence of meaningful manual review, and the possibility that legitimate consumer payments are being broadly restricted through opaque algorithmic processes despite confirmed withdrawal and settlement of funds. The inconsistency in treatment is particularly concerning. If one institution can restore approximately {$8000.00} in available credit the following business day using the same banking relationship and substantially similar payment conditions, it is unclear why other institutions require approximately one week to restore available credit after the funds have already been removed from the consumers account. These delays create tangible financial consequences for consumers. By withholding available credit after taking possession of the funds, issuers may : artificially elevate consumer credit-utilization ratios, reduce available borrowing capacity, delay purchases and transactions, place accounts into unnecessary liquidity constraints, and potentially contribute to adverse credit-reporting consequences if elevated balances are reported during the hold period. In my case, approximately {$1800.00} in pending XXXX purchases involving project materials, including bolts, nuts, rivets, and related hardware, were placed on hold due to the restricted availability of credit despite the fact that payment funds had already been withdrawn from my bank account. This issue also raises broader public-interest concerns. Public financial data indicates that : approximately 208 million Americans hold at least one credit card ; total U.S. credit-card debt exceeds approximately {$1.00} trillion ; the average revolving balance among indebted cardholders is approximately {$7800.00} ; and many American households maintain relatively limited liquid savings reserves. Under these conditions, temporary restriction of thousands of dollars in available credit after confirmed payment withdrawal may create substantial financial hardship for consumers. Additionally, even temporary institutional control over large aggregate volumes of consumer funds may create meaningful float value during the holding period. For example : if 1 million consumers experienced an average temporary hold of {$5000.00} for seven d ays, at a hypothetical 4.5 % annualized rate, the aggregate temporary float value could exceed several million dollars during that short period alone. I am not alleging intentional misconduct without evidence. However, the practices described above appear opaque, inconsistently applied, heavily automated, and potentially harmful to consumers who have already surrendered verified funds. Accordingly, I respectfully request : A written explanation regarding why substantially similar ACH payments received materially different availability treatment ; Confirmation regarding the date and time the ACH transfers were considered settled and verified by each institution ; Clarification regarding whether delayed restoration of available credit may impact utilization reporting to credit bureaus ; Disclosure regarding whether supervisory personnel possess authority to override automated payment holds after ACH settlement has been confirmed ; Clarification regarding the specific criteria used to trigger these payment restrictions ; Regulatory review into whether such automated payment-hold practices unfairly restrict consumer access to credit after payment funds have already been collected. Consumers should not lose access to thousands of dollars in available credit after verified funds have already been withdrawn from established accounts merely because an unexplained automated system flagged the transaction. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX

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