Consumer complaint received 2026-04-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Closing your account — Company closed your account
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM Synchrony Bank reported two 30-day late payments and closed my PayPal Credit account ( SYNCB/PPC, account number beginning XXXX, statement account ends XXXX ) after nearly ten consecutive years of on-time payments. The XXXX credit report now reflects late marks for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX and a " closed by credit grantor '' status. The only written pre-default notice I received from Synchrony on this account was a Notice of Right to Cure Default dated XX/XX/XXXX, stating {$330.00} was due by XX/XX/XXXX. During the period in which Synchrony reports these late marks, my personal checking account at XXXX held balances ranging from {$43000.00} to {$66000.00} orders of magnitude greater than any payment due on this account. DOCUMENTED PAYMENT HISTORY FROM SYNCHRONY 'S OWN RECORDS This PayPal Credit account had an exceptional payment history from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX approximately 9 years and 8 months of consecutive on-time monthly payments, per the XXXX credit report. No late payments were reported on this account at any time prior to XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Synchrony issued a Notice of Right to Cure Default stating {$330.00} was due by XX/XX/XXXX. That notice is a standard pre-default notice. It does not reference any prior returned payment, does not cite insufficient funds, and does not reference any failed automatic draft. I never received a returned-payment notice from Synchrony on this account. In XX/XX/XXXX, Synchrony closed the account at the credit grantor 's request. BANK BALANCE EVIDENCE ( XXXX VERIFICATION LETTER ) The following balances on my XXXX personal checking account ( ending XXXX ) are documented in a verification letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, signed by Banking Officer XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ID XXXX ), which is attached to this complaint : XX/XX/XXXX : {$47000.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$66000.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$43000.00} The lowest documented balance during XX/XX/XXXX {$43000.00} was approximately 130 times greater than the full amount Synchrony claimed was owed on this account ( {$330.00} ). No insufficient-funds condition could have existed on any documented date. WHY THE LATE MARKS AND CLOSURE ARE UNSUBSTANTIATED The only written notice Synchrony issued in connection with the alleged delinquency is the standard Notice of Right to Cure Default dated XX/XX/XXXX. That notice identifies an amount due but does not document any returned-payment event or failed draft. Despite my direct written request with bank verification attached, Synchrony has never produced a dated returned-payment notification, a specific failed-transaction identifier, or any other documentation of the alleged delinquency beyond the generic pre-default notice. Synchrony 's only response to my reinstatement request was a form letter that did not engage with the bank evidence I provided, did not identify any specific returned-payment event, and did not conduct any substantive investigation. PRIOR CORRESPONDENCE WITH SYNCHRONY I previously sent Synchrony a written reinstatement request, with the XXXX verification letter attached, asking them to reconsider the closure and correct the credit reporting. Synchrony 's response was a generic form letter that did not address the bank verification, did not identify any specific returned-payment event, and did not conduct any substantive investigation. Both my letter and Synchrony 's response are attached to this complaint. REQUESTED RESOLUTION Delete the 30-day late payment entries for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX on my XXXX XXXX and XXXX credit reports, or alternatively correct them to show the account was paid as agreed. Correct the " closed by credit grantor '' status, or delete the tradeline entirely, given that the factual basis Synchrony has offered for the closure is not supported by its own written records or by my bank records. Produce a substantive written explanation identifying ( a ) the specific date ( s ) any payment was allegedly attempted and failed on this account, ( b ) the amount ( s ) at issue, ( c ) the reason code returned by my bank ( if any ), and ( d ) how Synchrony reconciles its records with XXXX 's verification of available funds. LEGAL FRAMING Synchrony 's failure to meaningfully investigate this dispute, despite receiving direct bank verification and despite the absence of any documented returned-payment event, is inconsistent with its obligations as a furnisher of information under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ). Under FCRA Section 623 ( b ), a furnisher that receives notice of a dispute is required to conduct a reasonable investigation and report the results. A form-letter response that does not engage with the specific bank evidence provided does not satisfy that standard.

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