Consumer complaint received 2015-10-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — 
Issue: Billing disputes — 
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Citibank, N.A., issuer of my Citibank MasterCard, has knowingly permitted a fraudulent charge to remain on my account. XX/XX/XXXX I agreed to pay {$560.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Trucking for transportation of an automobile. My credit card, issued by Citibank, was charged that amount XX/XX/XXXX and services were rendered. Sixty days later, XX/XX/XXXX it came to my attention that an authorization of another charge of {$560.00} had posted as a pending transaction to my credit card and immediately called Citibank. Citibank treated this as a disputed transaction and issued a conditional credit of {$560.00} to my account. I did not receive any indication that further action on my part was needed until XX/XX/XXXX when I saw that a reversal of the conditional credit dated XX/XX/XXXX had appeared on my Citibank statement. At that time, I contacted Citibank to inquire about the return of this fraudulent charge and was informed that XXXX had provided a rebuttal to my dispute and that a response from me was required. I immediately logged into my account on the Citibank web site to review the documents that XXXX XXXX XXXX had provided. The XXXX document included : ( 1 ) a copy of the invoice showing that {$560.00} was the agreed amount for services rendered ; ( 2 ) a statement issued by XXXX XXXX XXXX 's bank indicating that funds from my credit card in the amount {$160.00} posted to XXXX XXXX XXXX 's account on XX/XX/XXXX and another {$560.00} posted to XXXX XXXX XXXX 's account XX/XX/XXXX ; ( 3 ) a handwritten letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX indicating that {$560.00} represented the total amount due. While the aforementioned rebuttal to the dispute omits any reference to the {$400.00} charge against my credit card by XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( the same date as the {$160.00} by XXXX XXXX XXXX, and an amount that brings the total charges on that date to {$560.00} ), it is a clear admission that XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Trucking are the same entity and that this entity charged my credit card on XXXX different dates in an amount above the agreed price. In numerous telephone calls to Citibank during the XX/XX/XXXX, I discussed all of the foregoing information with various representatives of Citibank 's dispute resolution department. By this time, all attempts by me as well as Citibank to contact XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Trucking were exercises in futility, as the business had been shut down. XX/XX/XXXX I summarized all of the relevant information in an email to Citibank and the fraudulent transaction of {$560.00} was re-characterized as a disputed charge, but the balance remained on my account. Additional phone calls on my part requesting that a proper investigation into the issue of splitting the XX/XX/XXXX transactions into XXXX charges that utilize the legal business name for XXXX and the same entity 's dba name resulted in a new dispute and a recommendation to change the account number of my Citibank credit card. However, XXXX the fraudulent transaction of {$560.00} appeared as a valid charge and became subject to interest accrual. In short, the failure of Citibank to act on the information that I originally provided XX/XX/XXXX allowed XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Trucking enough time to double charge my credit card, collect the funds, and close its bank account.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief