Consumer complaint received 2026-01-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card
Company: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
CFPB COMPLAINT NARRATIVE Consumer : XXXX XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Financial Institution : Goldman Sachs Bank USA Apple Card Case / Claim Number : XXXX Disputed Transaction Amount : {$1700.00} Transaction Date : XX/XX/year> Merchant : XXXX XXXX Purchase Summary of Issue I am submitting this complaint because Goldman Sachs denied my billing dispute for an Apple Card transaction dated XX/XX/year> in the amount of {$1700.00}, without properly establishing that I authorized the transaction or that I received the merchandise. I submitted a written dispute and supporting documentation, but the banks investigation was incomplete and procedurally defective under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) and Regulation Z. 
Why the Banks Decision is Improper Goldman Sachs did not provide verifiable proof that I authorized this purchase. There was no physical card use, no chip, swipe, or tap-to-pay transaction, no signature, and no written or verbal authorization from me. Reliance on Apple ID credentials, device tokens, or online platform access is not proof of cardholder consent and does not satisfy FCBA evidentiary standards. The bank also failed to prove that I received or accepted the merchandise. There is no signed delivery receipt, no photographic delivery confirmation at my address, and no evidence establishing that I ever took possession of the goods. Carrier timestamps or GPS logs are not proof of delivery to me or acceptance with my knowledge or consent. Under the FTC Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule, when delivery can not be proven, the merchant must issue a refund. Despite the lack of proof of authorization and proof of receipt, my dispute was denied.

Investigation Deficiencies The initial investigation relied on unsupported merchant or carrier notations rather than verifiable consumer evidence. The bank did not provide copies of the documentation used to reach its determination, and it did not demonstrate that a good-faith, Regulation Z-compliant reinvestigation was completed. This places the burden improperly on the consumer instead of the creditor, contrary to FCBA requirements. 
Steps I Have Taken I submitted a formal written dispute and requested reinvestigation and evidence disclosure. I also requested copies of merchant records, device or authorization logs, and delivery documentation. My request was not adequately addressed, and the claim remained denied even though proof of authorization and proof of receipt was never shown. 
What I Am Requesting I am requesting CFPB assistance to ensure that the dispute is reopened and reinvestigated in compliance with Regulation Z, that the bank provides copies of all evidence relied upon in its determination, that the disputed amount of {$1700.00} is reversed if proof of authorization and consumer receipt can not be produced, and that any negative credit reporting related to this transaction is removed. 
Desired Resolution I am requesting reversal of the disputed transaction in the amount of {$1700.00} and correction of my account. If the bank can not produce verifiable proof that I both authorized the transaction and received the merchandise, federal law requires reversal. I certify that the information provided in this complaint is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation