Consumer complaint received 2026-03-18 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: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
This is as it was explained to the credit card company : Chronology of Events 1. Booking & Payment Booked via XXXX : XXXX XXXX or similar. Full Protection via RentalCover prepaid with XXXX. Paid XXXX in advance ( rental + protection ), with XXXX one-way drop-off fee due at pickup. Total agreed price : XXXX for XXXX days. 2. Vehicle Pickup XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XX/XX/year> ) Only XXXX XXXX staff member present. Informed no XXXX XXXX was available ; free upgrade to medium-size XXXX. Provided pre-rental inspection report listing multiple damages : front-left bumper ( serious ), rear bumper ( medium/light ), rear-left and rear-right bumpers ( medium ), plus a generic scratch ( sga generica ). I signed the pre-rental report to confirm these were pre-existing. Took date-stamped photos of all visible damage and the cars generally dirty condition ( inside and out ). XXXX security hold placed on credit card. 3. Vehicle Return XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XX/XX/year> ) Returned car in identical condition as at pickup no incidents during rental. Staff presented post-rental inspection report seeking my signature to accept responsibility for damages the same ones already noted pre-rental. I refused to sign ; the report was marked rifiutato ( refused ). Staff stated : You will get the bill ; its up to you to dispute it. 4. After Return Received invoice for XXXX claiming damages identical to those in the pre-rental report. No photographic evidence of new damage, no repair invoices, no proof of damage occurring during my rental. Legal & Factual Arguments The pre-rental inspection report, signed by me, proves these damages were pre-existing. The post-rental refusal ( rifiutato ) proves I did not accept liability for those damages. Issuing a claim for pre-existing damages without proof of new harm is in bad faith and potentially breaches XXXX consumer protection law and the XXXX XXXX XXXX. This is not an isolated incident : multiple independent customer reviews report identical experiences with XXXX large damage bills for pre-existing issues, even when customers had photographic evidence and inspection records. This raises serious concerns of systematic abusive commercial practices potentially in breach of XXXX XXXX XXXX on Unfair Commercial Practices. Resolution Requested The only acceptable resolution is : Complete cancellation of the damage claim Written confirmation that no payment is owed Barclays has proceeded to treat the amount as an established debt rather than a contested claim. This raises serious concerns regarding : The accuracy of data being reported to credit reference agencies Compliance with data protection obligations, including the requirement that personal data be accurate and not misleading Fair handling of disputed transactions and customer complaints At a minimum, a disputed third-party claim of this nature must not be recorded or reported as a confirmed liability without appropriate investigation and qualification. score.

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