Consumer complaint received 2020-02-06 00:00:00
Product: Credit card or prepaid 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:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I entered into an agreement with XXXXXXXX to rebuild our business website. The first payment Invoice # XXXX was made in the amount of {$510.00} for the XXXX XXXX XXXX as advertised. They did not start to work on the site for several weeks. When the work proceeded there were troubling signs which I wasn't aware of at first. As changes were requested, for example, the spelling of our business name, was never corrected. Our business name is XXXX XXXX. This is outlined in the correspondence dated XX/XX/2019 in my rebuttal to Barclays Bank dispute. The evidence submitted by the above clearly shows this was never changed. Please refer to our chat conversation dated on XX/XX/2019 and actual pictures sent. They even went as far as to totally change our business brand and our logo without our consent. The above site designer sent fraudulent paperwork to the bank that the website was delivered. I provided the bank with proof that no website was delivered or existed by following this address XXXX XXXX XXXX. This is only a test site server. The actual web page was never delivered as they claimed. The bank failed to research my dispute nor did they address my concerns appropriately. The current website is XXXX. The information supplied by XXXX only shows delivery of logo 's. This isn't what the dispute is about. They can not document the fraudulent activity as this is electronic information and allows them the ability to avoid this evidence. The only intrinsic evidence is the logo 's that they clam was delivered. 
Unfortunately, I never approved this charge or authorized this purchase of logos or letterheads business cards. The billing receipts are inaccurate and distorted and fraudulent. They have not supplied evidence or addressed these receipts in an honest ethical business practice. 

The second charge occurred on XX/XX/2019 Invoice # XXXX in the amount of {$590.00} for Design-Registration. This is a fictitious charge applied. This payment as indicated by above was to secure my logo design from fraud by copyright protection. They said they had a legal department that would file the paperwork on my behalf. Barclay 's Bank failed to exam the authenticity of this payment with respect of copyright of my logo design. They ( XXXX ) failed to provide evidence that there was information sent to the copyright office or a serial number filing nor did they provide paperwork to substantiate this charge. Barclay 's Bank never researched this charge or observed that there was no supporting documentation as disputed in this matter. 

The final charge on XX/XX/2019 in the amount of {$450.00} Invoice # XXXX for Website-Hosting for ( five years ). There is no hosting as there is no website or website administrative rights given by the above fraudulent builder. The site is still in their control on the test server. There is no supplied documentation to prove otherwise. This is another bogus charge which Barclay 's Bank failed to investigate on my behalf. 

It became evident that during one of my online chats with the above, I asked for a physical address on their website company. After several minutes, the chat was turned off, and it was at this point the realization hit this is a fraudulent operation which bilked over {$1500.00} in credit card charges to my account. I subsequently suspended any further communication. I didn't want to be further harmed financially by this scheme. The paperwork sent to the bank by the above shows a third party called XXXX which I've learned is an online payment processing company. It is evident that these fraudulent individuals are biking the system by hiding behind this company located in XXXX XXXX California. They are manipulating their format by processing payments through their portal. As of this time, XXXX is looking into this matter as this could cause some major consequences for them on a federal level as I suspect. 

I recently learned the above web designer is actually operating approximately 17 different internet sites and potentially more. They are as follows : XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX  XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX There are offices located in XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and Delaware, New York as I've researched. They actually have an office in your area. The name of the firm is XXXX XXXX, XXXX located at XXXX XXXX   XXXX, XXXX, Delaware, XXXX. All of the above websites are mirrored images in how they operate. The language is similar along with layouts and advertising pop ups which appear when visiting these sites. 

If you check the XXXX XXXX XXXX on any of these sites listed you will find poor reviews and the same bilking techniques as was applied to my credit card charges while reading through the complaints. 

There are two apparent issues here from my experience. Barclay 's  Bank did not research my complaint to the fullest. They neglected to protect me as the consumer. They took it with face value agreeing with these fraudulent individuals. I supplied for them accurate information pertaining to my dispute. Barclay 's Bank should be chided for this poor handling of my case by your office. These charges should reversed immediately on my credit card. 

It also appears that this above matter may require law enforcement due to the nature of the many sites and bilking of money by of unsuspecting individuals and the many complaints found on different sites. 

I would appreciate your strictest of confidence with this information and appreciate any help your office may provide. Thank you for your attention regarding this matter.

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