Consumer complaint received 2026-06-08 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Fees or interest — Problem with fees
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to dispute Citibank 's handling of late fees and interest charges on my Citi Double Cash account ending XXXX. Citi has issued two written declines ( XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ) that fail to address the actual facts and contradict Citi 's own posting records. Background : For years, I have paid this account on time through XXXX XXXX XXXX BillPay. In early XXXX, Citi unilaterally changed its Bill Pay acceptance practices so that payments from certain third-party banks, including XXXX, are no longer accepted electronically and must be sent as paper checks. Citi did not notify me of this change in any form. Citi confirmed this policy change in writing in its XX/XX/XXXX letter : " Based on new payment criteria, a change was previously made to a portion of our Bill Pay processes... While we still process electronically, some banks will be required to send a paper check. '' The reconciled timeline of payments, comparing XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX written records ( XX/XX/XXXX confirmation letter ) against Citi 's own posting dates, is : XX/XX/XXXX statement : due XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX BillPay mailed check XX/XX/XXXX. Citi posted XX/XX/XXXX. No fee. XX/XX/XXXX statement : due XX/XX/XXXX. Paid online direct on XX/XX/XXXX. Citi posted XX/XX/XXXX. Late fee {$39.00}. XX/XX/XXXX statement : due XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX mailed check XX/XX/XXXX. Citi posted XX/XX/XXXX ( the due date ). Late fee {$30.00}, interest {$190.00}. XX/XX/XXXX statement : due XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Online payment posted XXXX XXXX ; XXXX check mailed XXXX XXXX, posted XXXX XXXX. No late fee, interest {$300.00}. XX/XX/XXXX statement : due XX/XX/XXXX. Paid online XX/XX/XXXX. Citi posted XX/XX/XXXX. Late fee {$41.00}, interest {$450.00}. The XX/XX/XXXX fee is the clearest error. Citi posted the payment on XX/XX/XXXX the due date itself and nonetheless assessed a {$30.00} late fee and {$190.00} in interest. Citi 's own XX/XX/XXXX letter states : " Payments are credited to your account on the day they are received. '' If Citi credited the payment on the due date, it can not be a late payment. The XXXX and XXXX interest charges are cascading interest from the XXXX late posting carrying a balance forward. If the XXXX charges are invalid, the cascading interest is also invalid. I sent a written XXXX dispute letter to XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Executive OfficXXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. Citi 's Executive Response Unit responded XX/XX/XXXX ( reference XXXX ), declining most of the dispute. The response cited payment amounts ( {$7600.00} and {$410.00} ) that do not match the actual XXXX BillPay check amounts ( {$30000.00}, {$12000.00}, {$11000.00} ) for the months in question, and did not address the XX/XX/XXXX statement at all. I sent a detailed reconsideration letter on XX/XX/XXXX with the full reconciled timeline and XXXX 's written confirmation. Citi 's " Office of the President '' responded XX/XX/XXXX ( reference XXXX ) with a five-sentence form decline that did not address any of the facts, dates, or contradictions raised. I also note that when I attempted to resolve this by telephone on XX/XX/XXXX, the Citi representative ( " XXXX '' ) not only declined to address the fees but cancelled my account during the call. I had to call back to have the account reinstated. This is a case of a bank : ( 1 ) making an undisclosed unilateral change to its payment acceptance practices that foreseeably caused on-time payments to post late ; ( 2 ) assessing fees and interest on payments its own records show were received on or before the due date ; ( 3 ) ignoring substantive written disputes ; and ( 4 ) handling the matter at the customer service level by cancelling the customer 's account.

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