Consumer complaint received 2026-01-24 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: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Company : Capital One Billing dispute ( a ) no response received from Capital One regarding multiple requests to change dispute category, and ( b ) improperly denied for unspecified information not provided, even though specified information was provided. 


Issue description : I timely filed a dispute for a credit card charge that should have been categorized as Service Not Provided. I mistakenly selected Refund when initiating the dispute. 

I promptly notified Capital One of the error and repeatedly requested that the dispute be reclassified to Service Not Provided. Despite multiple written messages, Capital One has not addressed the reclassification request. Instead, they have sent me XXXX identical requests for documentation that they previously requested when I initially filed as Refund. I have supplied Capital One with all of the documents available to me. My dispute is Service Not Provided the merchant hasnt provided me with Refund documents. Also, the merchant has not delivered the contracted work. This isnt a Refund dispute. 

I have clearly and repeatedly explained that refund-related documentation does not apply. Capital One has failed to take action to reclassify, or even to respond specifically to my reclassification requests. Instead, Capital One continues to send repetitive, seemingly automated requests for the same inapplicable information ( merchants agreement to cancellation/return, that would result in a refund ). 

As a result, I am unable to have my dispute reviewed on the merits due to a procedural error that Capital One refuses to correct. I believe this is a failure of dispute handling and customer service processes. 

In my understanding, under Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. 1026.13, a billing error includes services not delivered as agreed ( 1026.13 ( a ) ( 3 ) ). The regulation requires only that the consumer provide written notice of a billing error within 60 days of the statement showing the charge ( 1026.13 ( b ) ). Once timely notice is provided, the creditors investigation and resolution obligations run from the original notice date, not from any subsequent reclassification ( 1026.13 ( c ) ). 

Regulation Z does not recognize reclassification as a new dispute ; it requires only timely notice of a billing error for a specific charge, and subsequent clarification does not restart or invalidate that notice. 

Regulation Z contains no provision permitting a creditor to : Deny a timely dispute based on internal dispute coding or chargeback reason codes, Treat a clarification of dispute basis as a new dispute, or Restart or invalidate the XXXX-day notice period due to reclassification. 

Once a creditor receives timely notice of a billing error for a specific charge, the creditors obligations under 1026.13 ( c ) are triggered and run from the original notice date, regardless of later clarification. 

Denying a billing-error dispute because it was initially coded under an incorrect category improperly elevates internal chargeback procedures over federal consumer-protection law and is not supported by Regulation Z.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation