Consumer complaint received 2026-03-31 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: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
I am a 36-year Bank of America client and XXXX XXXX member. Bank of America has now denied my credit card dispute two times while repeatedly refusing to evaluate my claim under the correct federal legal provision. BACKGROUND : On XX/XX/XXXX, I was charged {$2200.00} by XXXX XXXX XXXX for an XXXX XXXX ( Order # XXXX ) that was never delivered. Over 18 months, I contacted the merchant eight times in good faith. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX confirmed a refund of {$2300.00} in writing, then never issued it. XXXX now has an F rating from the XXXX with XXXX unanswered complaints and appears to be going out of business. FIRST DENIAL ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : BofA denied Claim # XXXX citing the 60-day billing error window under 1026.13. SECOND DENIAL ( phone call, approximately XX/XX/XXXX ) : On appeal, BofA acknowledged the XXXX 540-day framework but argued I was 14 days past the cap. ( written, XX/XX/XXXX ) : I received a written response from XXXX XXXX of BofA 's Complaints Resolution Team ( XXXX ) stating she had " reviewed and completed an adequate investigation. '' Her letter again cites only the 60-day billing error window " per Regulation Z '' and the XXXX 540-day extension. She makes no mention of 1026.12 ( c ). THE PROBLEM : Throughout all three denials, Bank of America has evaluated my claim solely as a " billing error '' under 12 CFR 1026.13 and under Visa network rules. I have repeatedly in all my interactions with BOA such as, in emails to BofA 's executive team ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX ), and in direct communications invoked my separate, independent right under 12 CFR 1026.12 ( c ) to assert claims and defenses against the card Bank of America has never evaluated my 1026.12 ( c ) claim. Not once. XXXX XXXX. 's XX/XX/XXXX letter which she describes as an " adequate investigation '' does not mention 1026.12 ( c ) at all. THE LAW : The CFPB 's own Official Staff Commentary ( Supplement I to Part 1026, Comment 12 ( c ) -1 ) states unambiguously that 1026.12 ( c ) " operates independently '' of the billing error procedures under 1026.13 and that a cardholder " may assert claims or defenses under 1026.12 ( c ) '' regardless of whether billing error procedures have been invoked. Section 1026.12 ( c ) contains no 60-day limit, no 540-day limit, and no filing deadline of any kind. It is not governed by XXXX 's network rules. My underlying claims against the merchant which 1026.12 ( c ) permits me to assert against the card issuer include : Breach of contract ( product never delivered ; written refund commitment never honored ) Violation of the FTC Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule ( 16 CFR Part 435 ) Violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act ( A.R.S. 44-1522 ) Unjust enrichment under Arizona law I made eight documented good faith attempts to resolve this with the merchant over 18 months, satisfying the sole prerequisite under 1026.12 ( c ). ADDITIONALLY : XXXX XXXX. 's letter characterizes her investigation as " adequate. '' For a 36-year XXXX XXXX XXXX presenting a clear case of merchant fraud with a written refund confirmation, 278 unanswered XXXX complaints against the merchant, and a specific federal statutory claim that was never evaluated " adequate '' falls short. An adequate investigation would, at minimum, evaluate the claim under the legal provision the consumer has specifically invoked. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE : BofA 's first denial letter ( XX/XX/XXXX, Claim # XXXX ) XXXX XXXX. 's written denial ( XX/XX/XXXX ) proves 1026.12 ( c ) was never evaluated My formal letter invoking 1026.12 ( c ) ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Complete XXXX email correspondence ( XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX written refund confirmation of {$2300.00} ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Original order receipt ( Order # XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ) BBB XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX, F rating, XXXX unanswered complaints XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, AZ XXXX XXXX | ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Member since XXXX | BofA client since XXXX

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