Consumer complaint received 2022-10-07 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I purchased a XXXX XXXX  from a seller though XXXX. Sellers name is XXXX. The item listed online in the pictures seller provided as pure fresh green without visible discoloration or stains. In the sellers description, he used language as Bright color Rare Color, Premium grade Very plump But, the actual item I received is a counterfeited item full of deep dark stains which is undeniable super low-grade stone, and totally not as described as in sellers listing pictures or descriptions. 
I then contacted XXXX and opened a case with case number XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX informed me that the seller had agreed on full refund, and the full refund would be issued by XXXX after I return the item, also XXXX provided me the sellers return address. I returned the item as requested on XX/XX/XXXX, and uploaded the tracking number in my case in XXXX which is XXXX. 
The item was received by the seller on XX/XX/XXXX. It was delivered successfully. According to XXXX policy and agreement they indicated in the email between the 3 parties involved : XXXX, me and the seller, that once the conditions are met which are : I returned the item and the item is delivered by the address seller provided ( as the indication of arrival and reception ), the effect of full refund should be satisfied. 

But, XXXX had told me that if the item was lost during the XXXX Post Office, I would not be able to get my money back, which is controdictory to its policy. The I contacted my bank Citi bank for dispute on XX/XX/XXXX. And on XX/XX/XXXX, I was informed by Citi that their investigation is not favor in me, due to XXXX 's refusal and evidence they presented. 

XXXX presented fraudulent and self contradictory evidences with false claim as the return was never shipped out. XXXX used it as the reasoning for refusing return my payment. 
XXXX refusal for issuing the full refund is breaching the contract according the obligation XXXX should fulfill in the dispute of transaction, also is acting as confederate of online intentional scam. 

As my primary bank Citi, did not fulfill their due diligent to even notice the obvious wrong tracking XXXX is using for its ' claim. Now I am bearing the damage of being scammed due to XXXX failed to fulfill its obligation and intentionally failed to disclose the crucial information regarding the transaction as the result for misleading, and Citi failed to fulfill due diligent as the requirement for investigation. 

Please help me get my money back, since I did not do anything wrong as a victim. I have followed the guidance XXXX provided and cooperated in the hope of resolving this matter. Also, upon agreement of full refund with XXXX and the seller. I have fulfilled my obligation of returning the item regarding the address listed on XXXX agreement. But, now I am the one bearing the economic damage on not having the item that I intended to purchase listed in seller 's pictures, or the {$2200.00}. 

Please reference the attached evidence for corresponding details mentioned above. 

Continue : Responding the documents that XXXX provided : 1. Regarding the tracking number presented by XXXX ( showing the label was created ) and comparing the tracking number on the shipping label I created. The number XXXX provided began with XXXX, but the actual number in the shipping label I bought also as evidence XXXX provided is beginning with XXXX. This self-contractionary is not accident, but intentional. In my evidence I presented, on XX/XX/XXXX I have uploaded the correct number in XXXX system ; which indicated that XXXX using a faulty tracking number as reasoning to support them not fulfill their obligation of returning my payment, is intentionally fraudulent. 

2. XXXX also provided internal catalog of conversation on XX/XX/XXXX that seller claimed the item was not received or shipped on the same day. Please reference the official agreement that XXXX sent to me on the XX/XX/XXXX regarding condition for full refund and address for return. Also, in my evidence that on the same day XX/XX/XXXX, I have uploaded the tracking information in XXXX and the shipping label for return. And even in XXXX evidence of my shipping label included the time stamp supported my reasoning. For the international primary shipping the estimate date is 10 days. For XXXX exclusively presenting this faulty claim as their reasoning of refusal of fulfilling their obligation on the agreement between me, seller and XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, is clear that XXXX intention here is not just breaching the contract, also proactively and intentionally be fraudulent and be part of the scamming activities. 

3. Regarding the chat history the seller provided, there is not time stamps on any conversation, but any reasonable person read the content would see the content is about item inquiry and payment which happened before the item was shipped by the seller. Please reference the document attached that according to the seller in the chat, the item was shipped out on XX/XX/XXXX, and was received on XX/XX/XXXX. Also, please see the only time stamp the seller provided is at the bottom of all the conversation as XX/XX/XXXX, which means all the conversation before seller and XXXX presented was before seller even shipped out the item. This is totally irrelevant to the argument. No support to any reasoning for XXXX refusal of returning my payment. 

4. All the evidence XXXX provided to back up its reasoning was after XXXX the date that the returned item was successfully delivered to the seller. This support the conclusion that XXXX  intentional fraudulent act and intentionally breaches the contract for which it has failed to fulfill its obligation as the safeguard for online scamming activities. 

5. Seller has relisted this item online as {$2700.00}. 

6. All the information I provided is matter of fact and black and white. Through the truth, we can see how weak XXXX reasoning, claim is and how absurd the intention, motivation behind their illegal fraudulent act.

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