Consumer complaint received 2026-05-05 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit 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: WA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I purchased an XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for {$10000.00} ( {$9000.00} financed through Synchrony ). The chair failed within the first month ( error codes 03, 04, and 06 ). I reported the issue promptly and remained under an active extended XXXX warranty. Over the next two and a half years, at least five repair attempts failed. The chair has been completely unusable since shortly after purchase. Despite my repeated requests, XXXX XXXX denied both a replacement ( new chair ) and a refund after multiple failed repairs. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX manager treated me horribly and yelled at me saying he has the same chair and never had a problem. After I reported him and they heard the recording they attempted to give me {$100.00} credit for the store... They also engaged in a pattern of poor handling that included : Extended periods of ghosting with no meaningful response. Shifting responsibility between XXXX XXXX and XXXX without ever providing clear written instructions on the warranty process. Failing to provide technician reports despite multiple requests. Offering a replacement only after more than nine months, which I rejected due to lost trust. Their replacement offer was AN OPEN BOX item, which we did not buy a $ XXXX chair to receive a refurbished one. Providing Synchrony with a false narrative claiming consistent communication and swift resolution since late XXXX ( see attached Ticket # XXXX document ), while the actual record shows the opposite. provided Synchrony with extensive documentation showing the above pattern, including the full email chains and the misleading narrative XXXX XXXX submitted to them. Synchrony nevertheless denied my disputes multiple times, apparently accepting XXXX XXXX claims that they were willing to work with the customer and handling the matter consistently. Under the Fair Credit Billing Act, Synchrony had a duty to conduct a reasonable investigation. Accepting the merchants self-serving narrative while ignoring clear evidence of years of mismanagement, ghosting, false statements, and internal disorganization ( including XXXX own admission that he had to restart the case in XXXX ) does not meet that standard. This is a clear FCBA violation. I have paid for over 2.5 years on a completely unusable chair purchased for medical/therapeutic purposes. XXXX XXXX poor handling, lack of continuity, misleading statements to Synchrony, and refusal to honor warranty obligations after failed repairs, combined with Synchronys failure to properly investigate, have caused significant financial harm and distress. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX breached both the express written warranty and the implied warranty of merchantability by failing to repair or replace the defective XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX after multiple unsuccessful repair attempts, despite timely notice and while the product remained under an active extended XXXX warranty. Key Facts Establishing the Warranty Breach Valid and Active Warranties The chair was sold with an original manufacturers warranty plus an extended XXXX warranty that is still active as of XXXX. The warranty covers defects in materials and workmanship and includes remedies of repair, replacement, or refund when repairs fail. Timely Notice of Defect The chair failed completely within the first month of use ( error codes 03, 04, and 06 ). The defect was reported to XXXX XXXX on or about XX/XX/XXXX well within the warranty period and well before any argument of time has passed could apply. Multiple Failed Repair Attempts ( Reasonable Number Exceeded ) At least five technicians were sent over more than two years. Every repair attempt failed. The chair has remained completely unusable since shortly after purchase. Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the terms of the warranty, after a reasonable number of unsuccessful repair attempts, the consumer is entitled to a replacement ( new unit ) or a refund. Improper Denial of Warranty Remedies : I repeatedly requested a full replacement ( new chair ). XXXX XXXX and XXXX denied it. After multiple failed repairs, I requested a full refund. Both were denied. A replacement was eventually offered only after more than nine months and only as a used/open-box unit which I properly rejected. The later excuse that time has passed for a replacement is invalid : notice was timely, the warranty is still active, and the delay was caused by XXXX XXXX own failed repairs and poor handling. Bad Faith Performance of Warranty Obligations ( Evidence of Mismanagement ) XXXX XXXX repeatedly told Synchrony Bank they were willing to work with the customer and maintaining consistent communication. In reality, they engaged in extended ghosting, provided inconsistent information about who was responsible for warranty logistics ( XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX ), failed to supply technician reports, and sent parts without a proper diagnosis. Most tellingly, in XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ( the new representative ) wrote that XXXX is no longer with the company and that he had to catch myself up on the situation by going through all the emails and correspondence with her. He even asked me for a brief run down of the issues. This proves systemic lack of continuity and failure to properly administer and perform warranty obligations over a period of years. Because XXXX XXXX stopped responding meaningfully, I was forced to contact XXXX directly in XXXX on my own initiative. XXXX had no meaningful record of engagement until that point, directly contradicting XXXX XXXX claims to Synchrony that XXXX had been promptly and continuously involved since late XXXX. Because the chair was defective and the warranty was breached, and because XXXX XXXX engaged in deceptive practices while handling the warranty claim, the charges financed through Synchrony are subject to dispute under the Fair Credit Billing Act. Synchronys repeated denials, while accepting XXXX XXXX false narrative of consistent handling, constitute a failure to conduct a reasonable investigation. for the record, I attach the documentation I finally was able to get from synchrony bank after 2+ years of them telling me they are not allowed to give it to me. After insisting and letting them know I was filling this complaint, they provided it. On this documentation, they show " they coudlnt get in contact with me '' which it was the technitian calling with a number that came through spam and he never sent emails or texts only after we reached out to XXXX XXXX and they had them sending us a message. They are lying about the events on this as well. it is very important to note that XXXX claims not knowign about our situation only after i reported them in XXXX but XXXX XXXX claims says they were always aware, which is a big incnsistency and my warranty is damaged because of this. Synchrony also received a pdf i mailed to their address which was 41 pages. I have requested this documentation and they have refused to provide me with a copy of it. I have strong reason to believe that Synchrony did not conduct a proper or thorough investigation of my dispute and did not actually review the extensive documentation and evidence I submitted over multiple dispute filings. The core of my dispute is a clear breach of warranty under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the written/extended warranties on the XXXX XXXX XXXX. I provided Synchrony with detailed evidence including : Timely notice of the defect ( within the first month ) Multiple failed repair attempts by at least five technicians over more than two years The chair remaining completely unusable Repeated improper denials of replacement and refund XXXX XXXX misleading statements to Synchrony claiming they were willing to work with the customer while the actual email record shows extended ghosting and poor handling XXXX XX/XX/XXXX email in which he admitted XXXX is no longer with the company and that he had to restart the case by reading old emails clear evidence of systemic failure to properly manage the warranty claim Despite submitting this documentation, Synchrony continued to deny my disputes while apparently accepting XXXX XXXX self-serving narrative without meaningful review. I respectfully request that the CFPB : Require Synchrony Bank to specifically confirm which documents and evidence they reviewed in my case. Require Synchrony to directly address the warranty breach and the evidence showing XXXX XXXX provided false or misleading information to Synchrony. Obtain and review the full record of what Synchrony received from me versus what they actually considered.

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