Consumer complaint received 2026-07-21 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX I paid {$3000.00} to XXXX XXXX Specialists ( processed via XXXX ) on my Citi AAdvantage XXXX card for tax-preparation services, itemized on the merchant 's own receipt as : business return preparation ( {$890.00} ), personal return preparation ( {$1500.00} ), an annual audit-defense membership ( {$240.00} ), and a mid-year tax planning session ( {$280.00} ). The services failed in documented, material ways : ( 1 ) the draft returns delivered XX/XX/XXXX contained approximately {$49000.00} of combined tax overstatement {$93000.00} of XXXX distributions incorrectly carried as taxable income, and the XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX exemption ignored on my spouse 's XXXX income even though the preparer had confirmed that exact position in writing on XX/XX/XXXX ; ( 2 ) the {$280.00} planning session never occurred ; ( 3 ) the {$240.00} membership term was never usable because I was forced to terminate the engagement ; ( 4 ) the merchant never countersigned its own engagement letter. I disengaged in writing XX/XX/XXXX and requested a fair reconciliation. The merchant 's principal acknowledged my complaint in writing XX/XX/XXXX ( " I completely understand your frustration... responsiveness should have been better '' ) and then went silent past my written XX/XX/XXXX final demand ( deadline XX/XX/XXXX ), sending only marketing newsletters since. Notably, on XX/XX/XXXX 66 days after my written disengagement and five days after this dispute was resolved in the merchant 's favor the merchant 's own staff emailed me soliciting " any questions on the XXXX XXXX draft shared with you. '' The merchant 's own XXXX correspondence treats the {$1500.00} deliverable as an open, unaccepted draft, which contradicts any representation that the billed services were completed. I disputed the charge with full documentation ( Citi case XXXX, acknowledged XX/XX/XXXX ) : the merchant 's itemized receipt, my written disengagement and refund requests, the merchant 's written acknowledgment, and my XX/XX/XXXX demand documenting the {$49000.00} of preparation errors. Per Citi 's own dispute tracker : the merchant was contacted XX/XX/XXXX, the merchant responded XX/XX/XXXX, and on XX/XX/XXXX the dispute was resolved as " Customer Responsible, '' with the conditional credit reversed. Citi has never provided the written explanation of this determination. The XX/XX/XXXX email notification said a letter could be accessed in my online account ; as of XX/XX/XXXX XXXX days after resolution no decision letter appears in my account 's Notices and Letters ( the most recent letter there is the XX/XX/XXXX acknowledgment ), even though Citi 's own Dispute Center page states " A letter detailing your dispute resolution is available in your Notices & Letters. '' Any mailed copy would have gone to a former address still on file. I have never been told the reason for the denial or what the merchant submitted. I understand Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. 1026.13 ( g ), requires a written explanation when a billing dispute is resolved against the consumer. I do not believe the documented evidence was adequately reviewed. At no point did Citi share the merchant 's response with me, ask me for clarification, or give me any opportunity to rebut whatever the merchant claimed. A charge for services that were partly never delivered ( the {$280.00} session, the {$240.00} membership ) and partly delivered defectively with the defects acknowledged in writing by the merchant 's own principal is disputable under the card network 's " services not as described/ not rendered '' rules, and the record shows I attempted resolution with the merchant for XXXX weeks before disputing.

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