Consumer complaint received 2026-06-29 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: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting a complaint regarding Citibank 's handling of a credit card dispute involving an ongoing service contract. On XX/XX/XXXX, I paid {$7400.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) for end-to-end citizenship application services. The agreement was an ongoing service engagement, not a one-time purchase. The contracted services were to continue through completion of the citizenship application process. In XX/XX/XXXX, the merchant became unreachable. On XX/XX/XXXX, the merchant formally notified me in writing that it had ceased operations, would not complete contracted services, and would not issue refunds. This was the first time I became aware that the contracted services would not be completed. I promptly contacted Citibank and submitted a dispute based on merchant abandonment and services not rendered. Citibank informed me that I needed to provide a copy of the original credit card statement showing the transaction. Because I no longer possessed that statement, I repeatedly requested it from Citibank. Over the following months, despite numerous requests, I was repeatedly sent incorrect statements and was therefore unable to provide the specific documentation Citibank required. As soon as I finally received the correct statement, I promptly resubmitted my dispute package. Citibank ultimately denied the dispute, stating that it required my response within 60 days of the XXXX statement date and that it no longer had chargeback rights for charges older than 540 days. I recognize that Citibank must operate within applicable chargeback rules. However, I acted promptly after learning that the merchant had abandoned the contract and diligently pursued my dispute. The delay in completing my submission was significantly affected by my repeated efforts to obtain the documentation that Citibank required. Once I finally received the correct statement, I immediately completed my submission. My concern is not simply that my dispute was denied, but that I do not understand how the applicable timing rules were applied to an ongoing service contract. Citibank 's response refers both to a requirement that I respond within 60 days of the original statement date and to the absence of chargeback rights for charges older than 540 days. However, the response does not explain why those time periods were measured from the original XX/XX/XXXX transaction rather than from XX/XX/XXXX, when the merchant ceased operations, abandoned the ongoing service contract, and I first became aware that the contracted services would not be completed. I respectfully request that Citibank explain how it determined the applicable dispute period in this case, review whether my dispute was evaluated under the appropriate standards for an ongoing service contract, and consider whether the delays in obtaining the documentation that Citibank required should be taken into account in evaluating the timeliness of my submission. Thank you for your review.

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