Consumer complaint received 2026-05-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card
Company: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: PR

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Barclays regarding the handling of a fraudulent credit card transaction in the amount of {$770.00}. Around XX/XX/year>, I searched online for XXXX XXXX customer service assistance regarding a legitimate airline reservation. I contacted a phone number that appeared to be associated with XXXX XXXX. The individuals I spoke with used actual reservation information and a valid confirmation code connected to my trip, which created the appearance that I was communicating with the airline directly. I later discovered that the entity was not XXXX XXXX, but rather unauthorized third parties impersonating the airline through deceptive and fraudulent practices. I was induced into authorizing a charge under false pretenses and material misrepresentation. I promptly disputed the transaction with Barclays and explained that I had been the victim of fraud and impersonation. Although Barclays initially opened an investigation, the charge was later reapplied to my account despite the fraudulent circumstances surrounding the transaction. I requested that Barclays conduct a proper reinvestigation, but I continue to be held responsible for a charge that resulted from a scam operation impersonating a legitimate airline company. I believe Barclays failed to adequately consider the evidence of fraud, deceptive practices, and lack of informed consent surrounding this transaction. Barclays issued a written determination dated XX/XX/year> stating that, after a detailed review, it concluded that the disputed transaction was not fraudulent. However, the bank failed to meaningfully address the core issue of this case : that I was deceived by individuals impersonating XXXX XXXX through fraudulent misrepresentation and misuse of legitimate reservation information. The transaction was induced through deception, and my authorization was obtained under false pretenses. Barclays response does not explain how this critical fraud component was evaluated during its investigation. Additionally, on XX/XX/year>, I filed a report with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) regarding this incident under Report Number XXXX, further documenting the fraudulent nature of this transaction. I am deeply concerned that Barclays investigation into this matter was clearly deficient and inadequate. The bank failed to properly evaluate the fraudulent nature of this transaction, despite clear indicators of impersonation, deception, and lack of informed consent. This raises serious concerns not only about my individual case, but also about the level of protection Barclays provides to its cardholders. If fraudulent transactions induced through impersonation and deceptive practices are not properly investigated or reversed, consumers remain vulnerable to scams without meaningful recourse. Barclays handling of this matter effectively places its customers at risk, as it signals that even well-documented cases of fraud may not be properly addressed. This undermines consumer trust and fails to meet the standards expected of a financial institution responsible for safeguarding its customers against fraudulent activity.

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 explanation