Consumer complaint received 2025-06-12 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
1. On XX/XX/XXXX I followed a XXXX ad for XXXX XXXX marketed as " XXXX XXXX approvals '' implying the approval of the XXXX  was instant. For context normal cost of applying for XXXX XXXX through the government website is XXXX dollars and takes 3 days to process. My friend needed a visa, I had already applied for the XXXX  through the XXXX  government 's website. 

2. The company this XXXX ad led to was charging {$180.00} dollars. Because of the false advertising in their advertisement, I paid the {$180.00} dollars with Barclays XXXX so that my friend could have instant approval of a XXXX XXXX. 

3. Upon paying the amount, I found out their advertising was a scam, and they were simply charging {$180.00} dollars to submit the information through the normal XXXX government website but taking {$180.00} dollars to do so. I did further research and found out company is an anonymous offshore XXXX  XXXX company which essential exists as a scam to scam customers out of money, their trustpilot is full of reviews from people who got scammed. 

4. I immediately emailed the company calling them out for misleading the customer, they responded and said they would process a full refund back to me.

5. I waited and I never got the refund. They have ignored all further emails. Around 1 month after the initial transaction is when I discovered they never refunded me, and I filed a dispute via Barclays XXXX. Note that Barclay 's has a poor interface for reporting disputes, it can only be done online with limited option to explain the situation or provide evidence, a search online will yield they have countless complaints about their dispute department and process. 

XXXX. I went on an extended business trip, when I returned was when I saw the letter that my dispute somehow got denied despite the transaction being a genuine scam which the merchant had even agreed to refund ( but turns out that was a lie, he even lied and scammed about agreeing to provide the refund. ) Apparently all the merchant had to do was provide the evidence showing that I did make the purchase and that was all it took for the dispute to be denied, despite the fact that the situation here wasn't whether or not the purchase was made, it was the fact that the purchase was not as described and the merchant had agreed to refund but did not. 

7. I called into Barclays and the agent said no worries, just fax us the additional evidence and we will definitely re-open the case. So based on that I took the time to compile all the evidence and fax it in, the fax arrived to Barclays on XX/XX/XXXX which is within 120 days of the initial transaction. 

XXXX. I just received a letter back from Barclays stating " we are outside of the permitted timeframes to continue this claim through the dispute process '', which to me is completely ridiculous and unacceptable given the fact that this was a scam to begin with and Barclays did not protect me as I expected them to, I was also specifically told by a Barclays employee to resubmit the documents to reopen the claim so the letter I received goes directly contrary to what the Barclays employee told me, furthermore the time that Barclays received the evidence I faxed in on XX/XX/XXXX is still within 120 days of the initial transaction where I was scammed. 

9. I demand Barclays do the right thing. Barclays XXXX seems to have a systemic issue with their disputes department where they deny claims and make it difficult for the customer, such as in my case, to get rightful protection from fraud. I refuse to be scammed out of {$180.00} dollars and I do not accept the poor way in which Barclays has handled this case, I have never experienced anything like this.

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