Consumer complaint received 2018-02-25 00:00:00
Product: Credit card or prepaid 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: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I discovered XXXX website for needs and services to finding a caregiver for my XXXX Mother and a babysitter for my children. 

The service to advertise for a caregiver and a babysitter was free as long as one provides his/her personal information such as Email address, contact information to include complete name and a source to confirm personal information was real. Therefore, I used XXXX to confirm my true identity online. 

After advertising my ads for FREE and on XXXX, I would receive over 40 different applicants altogether. Unfortunately, there was no way how I would be able to contact those interested applicants in response to my ad/s. In fact, XXXX would require a purchase for an UPGRADE MEMBERSHIP to a PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP in order to make contact with each applicant. The upgrade would require a month membership due and if paid in full for 1 year, I would receive a discount. The membership also would guarantee 100 % satisfaction of service and suggest that each applicant was a real authentic person and that their information genuine. 

Therefore, XX/XX/XXXX, the Premium Membership was {$100.00} per year, and/or, {$9.00} per month. I upgraded my Premium Membership and paid for one year in full for in the amount of {$100.00} and through my Credit Card, Synchrony Bank DBA XXXX XXXX XXXX. The upgrade of membership would allow access to contact those 40 plus applicants and schedule appointments to meet with each person from the XXXX website. I wrote to each applicant such as ask questions and receive their responses. ( Refer to EXHIBIT B-1 Upgrade Receipt and C-1, Email  Correspondence ) Although I was not able to determine the authenticity of each person on XXXX and/or whether each applicant was a real-person, I could only assume and place my trust in XXXX that the people from the website were legitimate and real applicants respective to XXXX advertisement/s. I attempted to contact each all applicants to schedule interviews. I reserved more than over 20 appointments and from the 20, I was only able to confirm 10 interview appointments. As I would make contact with each applicant, I noticed that I was communicating with people from the website whom would confirm an interview appointment but not show up. I contacted each interviewee and each interviewee had made very similar excuse/s for not showing. Evidently, it appeared that ALL 40 plus candidates was a response from one person that responded under various aliass. 

Therefore, less than 21 days later I contacted XXXX Care Team and/or Customer Service on XX/XX/XXXX to address my concerns and open a formal complaint. I explained to the Care Team that I was unsatisfied with the service. XXXX advertised that I would be able to place an ad for free. From the ad, I was led to believe that candidates from the ad were legitimate and that I would be able to follow through with selecting and/or hiring from the list that XXXX provided. However, it appeared that all applicants were NOT LEGITIMATE during a further investigation. Furthermore, as I would attempt to set appointments for each applicant, to further determine the authenticity of a real person NOT ONE APPLICANT showed up to the interviews! To give any benefit of doubt to my claim, I made numerous attempts to contact and reschedule each person for another interview appointment. But unfortunately, and again, I would receive the same response over again that was similar from the previous excuse and similar in nature to another. 

I contacted XXXX to share my concerns and to emphasize the fact that applicants from the website appear to be false and fictitious. ( Refer to EXHIBIT C-2, Email Correspondence ) On XXXX, XXXX from the Care Trust & Safety Team, XXXX responded to my email and indicated that I report my complaint matter on the XXXX website under a link entitled, REPORT. Therefore, I followed through and reported my concerns from XXXX direction and instructions. ( Refer to EXHIBIT C-3, Email Correspondence ) Although matters would go unresolved, on XX/XX/XXXX, I filed another complaint to follow-up from my initial complaint by contacting XXXX XXXX Team. Again, I addressed my concerns and specifically named a candidate for the Care Team to follow up on. I explained that as I attempted to reschedule an interview appointment, the candidate was not able to verify any authenticity and/or prove that it was a real/live person as described through XXXX   website. Once again, I stressed the fact that XXXX was not providing a service as advertised. I felt misled as XXXX did not meet any expectations as it represented. ( Refer to EXHIBIT C-4,  Email Correspondence ) On XX/XX/XXXX, Care Trust & Safety Team, XXXX replied and only indicated that XXXX would document my concerns but provide no amicable resolution to the dilemma/s that I had expressed time over. Instead, I would receive a survey from Member Care. ( Refer to EXHIBIT C-5, Email Correspondence ) The way in which XXXX would respond to my complaint was completely negligent. In fact, XXXX did not rectify and/or resolve the gravamen that I had addressed on occasion. Instead, XXXX responded to my complaint matter inappropriately with a didactic reply to my complaint overall as my complaint matter was misguided by XXXX. Hence, the fact remained that it appeared that the website was falsely advertising customer care and/or customer service that XXXX failed to provide. 
Albeit, after I vetted and determine that each applicant whom responded to my ad, it appeared that I was talking to one sourced person that would appear to be of multiple people through different pictures and of different people unknown. 

Such act became even more suspicious as the website was not able to provide me with proof that each applicant was real and a legitimate person as pictured in the roster. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Synchrony Bank MASTERCARD to dispute my charge from XXXX and to remove charge from my account. In my complaint I addressed the fact that XXXX did not provide expectations as provided and that XXXX prevaricated from my complaint matter. Simply put, XXXX did not provide services as advertised. In turn, Synchrony Bank removed charges from my account. ( Refer to EXHIBIT D-1, Formal Complaint To Synchrony Bank ) In response to my charge dispute with Synchrony Bank, on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX removed and cancelled my Premium Membership and indicated that they would no longer charge my card. ( Refer to EXHIBIT C-6, Email Correspondence ) Unfortunately, Synchrony Bank misunderstood the complaint matter as Synchrony Bank erroneously would charge back my card in the amount of {$100.00} and on XX/XX/XXXX. I contacted Synchrony Bank to determine the purpose and/or reason/s why. Synchrony Bank indicated that they received a receipt that service was ordered from the website however Synchrony Bank completely dismissed the gravamen of the complaint in the first place.

( Refer to EXHIBIT D-2 and D-3, Formal Complaint To Synchrony Bank ) IN FACT, the complaint matter with Synchrony Bank wasnt about rendering a charge for a service from XXXX but, to dispute a charge for FAILURE TO PROVIDE CUSTOMER CARE and/or CUSTOMER SERVICE! Furthermore, I presented latent factors to the legitimacy that presented a level of quandary throughout. Another preeminent FACTOR that Synchrony Bank failed to recognize that XXXX CANCELLED my {$100.00}, PREMIUM ANNUAL MEMBER ( XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ) on XX/XX/XXXX! 

Therefore, the FACT remainsthat my card should credited and NOT CHARGED the {$100.00}! 

The Merchant, XXXX stated that my card would no longer be charged {$100.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. The yearly membership that I paid {$100.00} was supposed to cover one year, from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX was CANCELLED on XX/XX/XXXX by the Merchant named in the dispute! Based upon Consumer Rights and Fair Trade, I should NOT be charged for services and/or products that I am NOT RECEIVING!

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 monetary relief