Consumer complaint received 2025-07-13 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Overcharged for something you did purchase with the card
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, IA XXXX Subject : Complaint Against Capital One for Unfair Denial of Dispute Case Number : * * * Dear CFPB, I am filing a complaint against Capital One Financial Corp for the wrongful denial of my dispute for a {$240.00} charge on my account ( ending XXXX ) by XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, posted XX/XX/XXXX, for an expedited e-visa to XXXX required by XXXX Airlines ( PAL ). Capital Ones denial, dated XX/XX/XXXX, cites the dispute exceeding a 45-day Mastercard processing limit and my alleged failure to provide a transaction receipt or evidence of attempting to resolve the issue with the merchant. This denial misapplies Mastercard rules, ignores my diligent pursuit, and fails to address coercion and misrepresentation by PAL and WORLD TRAVEL, violating fair lending practices under the Dodd-Frank Act. I seek full restitution of the {$240.00} charge. 
Background of the Dispute : On XX/XX/XXXX, PAL denied me boarding as a XXXX citizen unless I paid {$240.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXXor an expedited e-visa, under extreme time pressure ( 30 minutes before my flight ). PAL failed to inform me during booking or thereafter of XXXX XXXX requirement, which I could have obtained for {$25.00} {$28.00} via the official portal ( evisa.xuatnhapcanh.gov.vn ). The {$240.00} charge, a 980 % markup, constitutes predatory pricing. PAL directed me to a XXXX XXXX representative via phone, offering no alternative, suggesting coercion and possible collusion, as XXXX XXXX may be a PAL affiliate or subsidiary. 

Capital Ones Wrongful Denial : 1. 45-Day Processing Limit : Capital One claims the dispute exceeded Mastercards 45-day timeframe ( likely the merchants second presentment window ). I diligently pursued the claim by : a ) Filing the dispute via phone on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX days after the charge. 
b ) Sending a follow-up letter on XX/XX/XXXX, with initial evidence. 
c ) Submitting an appeal letter on XX/XX/XXXX, with additional documentation ( attached ). Mastercard rules allow exceptions for diligent cardholder pursuit ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). Any delay was due to XXXX Ones processing or XXXX XXXX  non-responsiveness, not my actions. Denying my dispute on this basis is unfair. 

2. No Separate Receipt : Capital One claims I failed to provide a receipt. XXXX XXXX provided no separate receipt, typical for airport-based electronic services. My credit card statement, showing the {$240.00} charge to XXXX XXXX  was submitted and suffices as transaction evidence under Mastercard rules ( XXXX, XXXX ). Capital Ones demand for a separate receipt is unreasonable. 

3. Merchant Resolution Attempts : I informed Capital One during the initial dispute ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and in my appeal letter that I called XXXX XXXX three times ( using a number provided by PAL at check-in, approximately late XX/XX/XXXX ) with no response. This demonstrates a good-faith attempt, as required by Mastercard ( XXXX, XXXX ). Capital One dismissed this without requesting further details ( e.g., call logs, available if needed ). 

4. Coercion and Collusion : The {$240.00} charge qualifies as services not as described under Mastercard reason code 4853 due to misrepresentation and lack of informed consent. PALs failure to notify me of the e-visa requirement forced me into an exploitative fee. Evidence suggests XXXX XXXX may be a PAL affiliate, as PAL exclusively directed me to them at the gate, heightening coercion and potential collusion. Capital One failed to adequately consider this.

Evidence Available and Provided to Capital One : i. Credit card statement showing the {$240.00} charge to XXXX XXXX 
ii. PAL booking confirmation/emails showing no visa requirement warnings. 
iii. Screenshot of Vietnams e-visa portal showing standard fees of {$25.00} {$28.00}. 
iv. Phone call evidence to XXXX XXXX requesting a refund ( verbal confirmation ). 
v. Detailed timeline of the incident ( included in XX/XX/XXXX, appeal letter ). 
vi. Appeal letter to Capital One ( XX/XX/XXXX, attached ). 

Relief Requested : I request that the CFPB investigate Capital Ones denial for : i. Misapplying Mastercards 45-day rule based upon my diligent pursuit.

ii. Unfairly requiring a separate receipt when the statement suffices.

iii. Dismissing my documented attempts to contact XXXX XXXX 
iv. Failing to address coercion, misrepresentation, and potential collusion by PAL and XXXX XXXX. I seek full restitution of the {$240.00} charge and an apology from Capital One for their unfair handling of my dispute. 

For PAL and XXXX XXXX coercive and exploitative practices, I am filing a separate complaint with the U.S. Department of Transportation against PAL. However, I request the CFPB consider their actions as context for Capital Ones failure to recognize the charges deceptive nature.

Please contact me at information provided. I can provide all below evidence and supporting documents.

Sincerely, Capital One Account Number : ending * * * * Attachments, ( if provided method to provide this evidence Appeal Letter to Capital One ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Credit card statement PAL booking confirmation Vietnam e-visa portal screenshot

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation