Consumer complaint received 2026-01-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Other problem
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
CareCredit / Synchrony Bank Account Ending in XXXX ( Only Account Acknowledged ) XXXX. Scope and Identification of Account This escalation concerns CareCredit, a Synchrony Bank product, and only XXXX account : Account ending in XXXX. 

I do not acknowledge, recognize, or accept the existence of any other account number allegedly created after the closure of this account. I did not request, authorize, or consent to any new account, card, or account number, and I did not file any fraud complaint. 

Any reference by CareCredit or Synchrony Bank to a new account or fraud investigation is expressly disclaimed and rejected. 

XXXX. Nature of the Original Dispute A Valid Chargeback The underlying dispute on Account XXXX was a chargeback based on service failure and billing errors, never fraud. 

Specifically : Services billed by the hospital were not rendered as represented and/or were incomplete. 

Billing accuracy and integrity were disputed. 

Documentation was provided repeatedly. 

CareCredit/Synchrony responded by stating they : Can not judge quality of services, and Relied on hospital signatures and statements denying wrongdoing. 

A providers denial and a signed financial agreement do not constitute an investigation. 

Refusing to assess service failure or billing errors does not defeat a chargeback ; it avoids it. 

This was, from the outset, a legitimate chargeback complaint that should have been granted or, at minimum, substantively evaluated. 

XXXX. Procedural Mishandling Mirrors the Substantive Failure The same defects appear repeatedly : Recycling the same denial language Ignoring evidence already on file Requesting documents already submitted Issuing conclusory denials without engagement This mirrors how CareCredit/Synchrony later responded to multiple CFPB complaints, by collapsing distinct issues into XXXX generic packet, showing no individualized review. 

XXXX Retaliatory Account Closure Without Notice On or about XX/XX/XXXX, Account XXXX was closed without advance notice and without legitimate cause. 

At the time : There were no late payments nor are there any right now. 

The account was in active dispute Any over-limit status was caused by fees and charges added during investigations, which should not have occurred I discovered the closure only on XX/XX/XXXX, when I was locked out of online access. 

The explanations I was given were contradictory and false. 

XXXX Fabricated Fraud Narrative Explicitly Rejected After CareCredit/Synchrony were questioned ( including through CFPB complaints ) about the improper account closure, they introduced a false fraud narrative. 

They claimed : I requested a fraud investigation A new account was opened for security reasons Fraud denials were issued on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX This is false. 

I did not : Request a fraud investigation Report fraud by phone, mail, website, or complaint Ask for a new account Receive a new card Receive mailed notice of any new account Submit any fraud affidavit Contact identity theft services Yet CareCredit/Synchrony proceeded to : Issue fraud denial letters through CFPB responses Pressure me to swear affidavits and report identity theft * * * Continue advancing this narrative to regulators as fact * * * * This appears to be a post-hoc fabrication designed to justify an otherwise unjustifiable account closure and to sever the dispute history tied to Account XXXX. 

XXXX. Direct Regulatory Question Demand for Proof CareCredit and Synchrony Bank should be required to answer the following : When exactly was the alleged fraud request made? 

By what method ( phone, mail, website, written complaint )? 

What proof exists that I initiated it? 

Why do fraud denials exist for a claim I never filed? 

Advancing a fabricated fraud claim to regulators is a serious compliance violation. Fraud is a major red flag ; lying about it undermines the credibility of every other assertion the company makes. 

XXXX. Pattern of Misrepresentation to Regulators I previously filed a CFPB complaint specifically addressing CareCredit/Synchronys attempt to coerce me into adopting their fraud narrative. Despite this, they continue to present it as fact. 

They also responded to multiple CFPB complaints filed on different dates, involving different violations, with a single recycled response packet, demonstrating : No individualized investigation No timeline-specific analysis No good-faith engagement This pattern confirms that : The dispute investigation was never legitimate, and The CFPB complaint responses were likewise noncompliant. 

XXXX. Regulatory Concerns Raised This escalation raises serious concerns regarding : Failure to conduct good-faith chargeback investigations Concealment of material third-party evidence * * * Retaliatory account closure during an active dispute * * * Fabrication of a fraud narrative * * * Unauthorized account creation * * * Misrepresentation to regulators Abuse of the CFPB complaint response process

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