Consumer complaint received 2023-08-07 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I was out of XXXX, FL on XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2023. On XX/XX/2023, around XXXX I received a notification alert on my cell phone that said that a {$240.00} charge was made from my account at a XXXX XXXX at XXXX. I immediately logged into my bank account to verify the truth behind it and it was true. I immediately contacted my bank from the car due to the fact that I was on my way back to XXXX, FL from XXXX FL. I advised the representative that there was a fraud on my account and that I knew it was not me because I was not even in XXXX at the time of the use. I had my debit card on me and always do and my bank transaction will reflect that I had just used the card earlier in the day in XXXX FL. On XX/XX/2023, I contacted the bank again to follow up on the status of the fraud and was advised that nothing new had been done and at that time it would take up to 10 business days for a credit to be issued to my account for these funds. Needless to say, I was upset because here I was the victim in this situation and my own banking institution is treating me like I am a criminal. I called back again on Tuesday and was advised that there still was no update to the fraud and at that point, I contacted my local police department ( JSO ) to file a police report in hopes that it would speed up the process of returning these funds to my account. The police officer came to my home to gather a statement from me and I was advised at that time that the card had been used relatively close to my home which leads me to assume that this person got my information prior to me even leaving for XXXX on XX/XX/2023. The police officer went to XXXX and reviewed the camera footage of the incident in question and came back to my home to show me the picture of the woman using a card at a self check out register. I still had the physical card in my possession and I was advised that criminals are using skimmers to obtain bank information to clone debit cards and make them accessible for them to use. The officer said the woman parked in the further parking area of the parking lot and was unable to obtain the tag information for the woman who made the purchase. I contacted CitiBank immediately and provided them with the case number that the officer provided me and then I let it rest for the week in hopes that today, Monday, XX/XX/2023, there would be a resolution. I contacted the bank today since I did not see the funds back in my account and was advised that my case had been closed and denied due to the debit card being in my possession at the time of the fraud. This is completely ridiculous when I have a police report of the fact that it was another woman who used a cloned card to make this fraudulent purchase. I have now had to dispute this case again today with an updated case number and now will have to wait up to 10 additional business days in hopes that these funds are returned to me. If these funds are not returned to my bank account, I have already obtained legal counsel and will move forward with litigation to rectify this situation. It is ridiculous that there is camera footage and a police report that states this was in fact not myself who made this purchase and proof that I was not even in XXXX Fl and the card was used in XXXX FL just earlier that day which is over 3 hours away from XXXX FL. I am completely distraught with how the bank is handling the situation and I will never recommend this bank to anybody. These funds need to be refunded back to me and legal repercussions should take place for the woman who fraudulently cloned my card and used it. If my funds are not returned to my bank account by XX/XX/2023, I will move further with the legal counsel I was forced to obtain today to rectify this situation.

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