Consumer complaint received 2026-05-31 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: OR

Complaint narrative:
We are filing under 15 U.S.C. 1666i ( claims and defenses ) and 15 U.S.C. 1666 ( billing error investigation adequacy ). On XX/XX/XXXX, we contracted with XXXX XXXX XXXX ( " XXXX XXXX '' ) to install 14 windows at our XXXX, Oregon home. Both the XXXX XXXX contract and the Synchrony Sales XXXX are unambiguous : the {$29000.00} balance is due " upon installation '' and charged " upon completion. '' Installation never occurred. An independent licensed Oregon contractor the only person XXXX XXXX deployed to our property confirmed this under signed declaration ( XX/XX/XXXX ). Photographs confirm the original windows remain in place. On XX/XX/XXXX 21 days after XXXX XXXX 's missed and unrescheduled installation appointment Synchrony disbursed {$29000.00} to XXXX XXXX. We received no notification. We discovered the disbursement on XX/XX/XXXX when our first statement arrived, and filed a dispute within one hour. Since XX/XX/XXXX, we have formally demanded in every submission to both parties the documentation XXXX XXXX submitted to trigger that disbursement : any draw request, completion certificate, or attestation that installation had occurred. Neither party has produced it. XXXX XXXX has not responded to any of fifteen documented contact attempts across phone, email, and certified mail. Certified mail to the company 's registered owners was returned undeliverable. The company 's LLC renewal lapsed XX/XX/XXXX. The Utah XXXX XXXX XXXX has flagged XXXX XXXX as believed to be out of business. The completion document does not exist because no work was ever performed and the merchant has now disappeared with {$29000.00} of our money, leaving Synchrony as the only party capable of making this right. In the Dispute 2 denial, Synchrony produced the XXXX XXXX XXXX the financing authorization we signed at contract execution, five months before any work was performed. This document can not establish completion. Its own terms condition the charge on completion. It is the starting point of the transaction, not its conclusion. Synchrony has denied three disputes without producing the one document that would actually matter : a cardholder-signed completion acknowledgment. That document does not exist because there was never anything to complete. Three denials. Each mischaracterized our claim. None engaged with its substance. Dispute 1 : denied as a cancellation we did not cancel ; XXXX XXXX failed to perform. Dispute 2 : denied as a quality concern there is no installed product to evaluate. Dispute 3 which included a signed contractor declaration, photographs, and a VP-level admission of XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX embezzlement and collapse was denied with the identical boilerplate as Dispute 2. Synchrony also relied on a " no breach '' letter from XXXX XXXX 's VP dated XX/XX/XXXX eight days after he admitted embezzlement to us in writing. Synchrony 's investigation never surfaced the contradiction. The regulatory concern : if the XXXX XXXX is how Synchrony validated this disbursement, the XXXX XXXX program has no mechanism to verify contractual completion before releasing merchant funds a structural deficiency affecting every XXXX XXXX XXXX financing a home improvement project. A complete dispute packet with 10 exhibits has been submitted concurrently.

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