Consumer complaint received 2026-05-21 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: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
BELOW I AM PASTING THE XXXX MOST IMPORTANT LETTERS I SENT TO CAPITAL ONE, BUT THIS IS NOT ALL OF THE CORRESPONDENCE. I REQUEST THAT YOU REQUEST THE ENTIRE FILE FROM CAPITAL ONE. Capital One Credit Card Dispute, Case XXXX Date of transaction : XX/XX/XXXX Merchant : Billed as Fanbasis.com, but that must be the biller for the actual merchant, which is XXXX XXXX Amount : {$4000.00} ( From XXXX XXXX ) I am writing inform you of my intentions regarding this credit card dispute, and explain my reasoning. Your decision is manifestly wrong. This chargeback is appropriate for at least XXXX reasons, as outlined in my prior correspondence. When I called your customer service number, I was informed that your denial was based on a XXXX rule that precludes chargebacks when any part of the services have been used. But that is an inaccurate statement of XXXX rules, and more importantly, fails to enforce my rights under federal law ( the Fair Credit Biling Act ). Mastercards own manual to card issuers states that chargebacks are appropriate for XXXX or services [ that ] were either not as described, defective, or not provided. Your analysis focuses exclusively on the not provided category, and totally ignores not as described and defective. Services that were not as described or defective contemplates that the services were in fact provided ( at least in part ). ( Mastercards merchant guide can be found here : https : XXXX ) I have painstakingly detailed and evidenced that the services I received were not only not as described and defective ; I have also clearly established that I was induced into the contract through multiple intentional material misrepresentations, which amounts to civil fraud ( in Mastercards language, didnt match the sellers description ) also grounds for a chargeback. The total contract price for the service at issue was {$10000.00}, and the payment was split onto XXXX cards. I have disputed the charges with all three card issuers, and you are the only XXXX to deny this claim, even though I have submitted much more evidence and explanation to the others. Your process for reviewing my claim evinces a careless process that is set up to swiftly deny claims with little thought given to the consumers evidence or description of services or events. You rejected my claim upon my first attempt at evidence submission in no more than XXXX minutes. I repeatedly sought clarification, receiving almost none and in written form, nothing more than a repeated iteration of a form letter that includes no reasoning for the denial, and does not specify exactly what evidence could be adduced to successfully support a claim and received just minutes after each immediately prior evidence submission. This is a systemic problem. The following federal government website spells out the appropriate remedy for a consumer whose credit card dispute has been wrongfully denied under the federal law : https : XXXX. I suggest that an attorney review my case, and review that website as well. In summary, in this circumstance where the consumer has a Complaint about the quality of something bought and the card issuer has denied the disputed charge, the consumer can take the same legal actions against the issuer as [ he ] can take against the seller. Here, my rights against the merchant, for civil fraud and breach of contract, include the election of rescission of the contract and a refund of my money ( {$4000.00} ). I hereby elect this right, and assert it against Capital One. This negates my debt for this amount to Capital One. From this point, I will pay what I owe you, which does not include this {$4000.00}, and will thereafter sever our relationship. If you make any report to a credit reporting agency, I have the right to sue you for damages. I welcome a reasoned and precise response to this letter and my entire file, mailed to me. But dont both to send me the same useless form letter you have already sent me XXXX or so times. I will also be sending this via certified mail. I request that you forward this to your legal department and have it reviewed by a qualified attorney. I suggest that you have an attorney review this file before the chargeback window has closed, so that the merchant is not allowed to unjustly keep this {$4000.00} at your expense. If I have not received a response from you within XXXX ( XXXX ) business days, I will file a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. If you do not approve my claim, please provide all documentation relating to this claim, including the sellers submissions, your analyses, and any other documentation in this file, and a reasoned and precise explanation of your decision, so that I can take appropriate additional action, as necessary. Regards, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX INITIAL LETTER TO CAPITAL ONE, DESCRIBING THE INTERACTIONS WITH MERCHANT ( FALSELY DESCRIBED SERVICE, POOR QUALITY OF SERVICE ) Case XXXX Date of transaction : XX/XX/XXXX Merchant : Billed as Fanbasis.com, but that must be the biller for the actual merchant, which is XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$4000.00} Cynta is a scam. I was promised maximum XXXX percent drawdown ( and the website promises * no * drawdowns as indicated in the attached screenshot ), but they lost * XXXX percent of my entire brokerage account * in the * first XXXX minutes of trading ( as indicated in the attached screenshot ) *. This is very far from the XXXX % monthly returns promised ( as seen in the attached screenshot, and by the salesman XXXX ) and is direct breach of their warranty that there are * * no drawdowns. * * ( A drawdown is a loss. ) Representing that there will be no drawdowns, in light of an immediate XXXX percent loss, is clearly a material false representation i.e., fraud, which in itself entitles me to rescind the contract and obtain a refund. After losing a huge amount of capital, I insisted that they return my money and cancel my account, but they refused ( as indicated in the attached screenshot ) despite their clear, no questions asked 90 day money back guarantee ( see attached screenshot from their website ). But, as indicated in the attached screenshot, the XXXX representative said that the 90 day satisfaction guarantee is evaluated at the conclusion of the 90 day period. But that is unequivocally not what the website or the contract say ( see attachments ). ( This took place on XX/XX/XXXX. ) The wording of the the 90 day money back guarantee in the contract ( see attached screenshot ) is that they will return your money if dissatisfied for any reason by XXXX XXXX, and they claimed that I had no right to a refund until * after * 90 days * ; but that is not what the contract ( or the representation in the website ) clearly says. By 90 days means anytime before or upon 90 days. And I made my request within this time window. And I certainly was not going to leave my entire account under their control for 90 days after they lost XXXX percent of all of my money * in the first XXXX minutes. *. Meanwhile, the website ( see screenshot ) advertises, simply and without qualification, 90 day money back guarantee. The contract indicates that a client breaches the agreement by threatening or initiating chargebacks, and that such a breach would void their 90 day money back guarantee. But they not only defrauded me into this contract ( as discussed below ), which voids the contract entirely and entitles me to rescission and a refund ; they also materially breached by refusing my refund ( itself entitling me to rescind the contract and obtain a refund ) BEFORE I initiated a chargeback. Moreover, this provision is a clear attempt to circumvent federal law ( the Fair Credit Billing Act ) especially in light of the provision they include in the contract that says that they have 60 days to return your money : initiating a chargeback voids the 90 day money back guarantee, but they dont actually have to return your money until after the time in which you have to initiate a chargeback has passed. If they ultimately failed to return your money after 60 days, the buyer is left with no recourse under federal law rendering the statute entirely ineffectual. It therefore can not possibly be enforceable. And having researched the law on this point, these chargeback waivers are in fact not enforceable as a matter of law, because they nullify consumer protection laws. And now that I have initiated a chargeback, XXXX is sure to refuse to refund my money pursuant to the guarantees, so this is my only recourse. Next : during the sales presentation, XXXX also claimed that * every trade * was approved by their XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), and that sometimes there was only XXXX or even XXXX trades in a given week, because they were so conservative in their trades. But even during the first XXXX minutes, * several * trades were made very, very rapidly by what was clearly a trading bot ( not a human ) ( the trades were moving too fast for human analysis ). And I know their XXXX works a full time job at another company ( XXXX ) ( XXXX said he would be fired from XXXX if XXXX knew he was working for XXXX ), so he can not possibly be overseeing these trades. Maybe he generally oversees the algorithm behind the bot, but he is not overseeing individual trades, as XXXX promised. Finally, and of crucial importance : XXXX fraudulently represented to me that XXXX had been in business for * XXXX years * when I specifically asked about this. I was concerned about spending {$10000.00} ( the total cost of the license, which I put on XXXX different credit cards ) for a lifetime license on a company that could go bankrupt, leaving me with no recourse to recoup my money. ( And as indicated in the screenshot, the XXXX website says they have a XXXX year track record also false. ). But I was later informed by their competitor that XXXX was brand new. And when I looked the company up on the Wyoming XXXX XXXX XXXX ( government website ), the company was not actually formed until * * XX/XX/XXXX * * just XXXX months before the sales presentation. This is fraud. This left me deeply fearful that they would go out of business once market conditions turn, and I would be left with nothing. Here is the link to that government website ( a screen shot is also attached ) : https : XXXX? XXXX After I discovered this fraud the day after the purchase ( but before actually using the platform ), I Immediately told XXXX that I wanted a refund, but XXXX refused. He was very, very forceful in his insistence that no refund would be given if I did not at least try the platform. So I agreed to at least try the platform. But after this point, and after they refused a refund even after they lost XXXX percent of my money and I requested a refund pursuant to their 90 day money back guarantee, I knew there was no point in trying to deal with them directly. As an attorney, I know that any XXXX of these bases is grounds for rescission of this contract, as well as a chargeback under the Fair Credit Billing Act. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX * * I also want to note that I contacted the merchant XXXX additional times, as described in my correspondence with Capital One, and both times they refused me a refund. I request that Capital One review the entire file I have already submitted. * *

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation