Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 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: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Capital One for failure to conduct a lawful investigation of a billing dispute in violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), 15 U.S.C. 1666 et seq., and Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. 1026.13. I. NATURE OF THE UNDERLYING DISPUTE On XX/XX/XXXX, I was charged {$2100.00} by XXXX * XXXX XXXX on my Capital One Venture X card ( a Visa Infinite product ). The basis of my dispute is that the hotel failed to deliver services as represented and billed me at a premium room rate for an inferior replacement room. Specifically : 1. My original room contained a pillow with visible XXXX staining and a couch with visible unknown staining. I have photographs documenting both conditions. XXXX XXXX 's own published policy XXXX XXXX XXXX expressly represents that guests receive " luxury linens '' as an included amenity. XXXX XXXXstained pillow does not satisfy that representation. XXXX. I was moved to a smaller replacement room. Staff made two separate commitments to thoroughly clean the replacement room. Both promises were broken. I have photographs of the uncleaned room taken after the second cleaning assurance. XXXX. The hotel billed me at the original higher room rate despite placing me in an inferior replacement room and agreeing via text message to bill me at the lower rate, this is a documented billing discrepancy supported by an invoice I provided to Capital One. XXXX. The property exhibited multiple life-safety code failures, including an unmounted fire extinguisher with an inspection tag dated XX/XX/XXXX, a locked door marked " EXIT, '' and a window labeled " ESCAPE WINDOW '' opening directly onto HVAC equipment. I have photographs of each condition. XXXX. I sent the hotel a written complaint requesting resolution within five business days. The hotel never responded. The reservation was made through XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). XXXX 's own Terms and Conditions expressly identify chargebacks arising from a supplier 's failure to deliver services consistent with its product description as a cognizable dispute category. II. CAPITAL ONE 'S CONDUCT I timely initiated a chargeback dispute with Capital One. I submitted a detailed written narrative and supporting documentation, including photographs of the conditions described above, the hotel 's published policy, XXXX 's Terms and Conditions, and my unanswered written complaint to the hotel. Capital One subsequently requested one specific additional item : an invoice demonstrating the billing discrepancy between my booked room rate and the inferior replacement room I received. I again provided the requested invoice. Despite my submission, Capital One closed my case citing that I had failed to provide " previously requested information. '' That statement is factually inaccurate. I contacted Capital One and requested the case be reopened. Capital One closed the case a second time on the same stated basis. I submitted substantial documentation, including another copy of the invoice showing that I was overcharged. Capital One again closed the case stating that I had not provided requested documentation. That statement again is factually inaccurate. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called Capital One again to escalate. My first call was disconnected. On my second call, I spoke with a representative named Rain, who told me that Capital One had concluded its investigation and would not reopen the dispute. I then spoke with a supervisor identified as XXXX, a fraud account manager, who provided the following explanation for Capital One 's denial : that the merchant had a no-refund policy and Capital One would therefore honor the merchant 's position and not issue a refund. This explanation is legally untenable for two independent reasons. First, a merchant 's internal no-refund policy does not extinguish a cardholder 's federal chargeback rights under the FCBA. The FCBA creates a statutory right to dispute billing errors that exists independently of any merchant policy. A card issuer can not lawfully deny a chargeback solely on the ground that the merchant declines to issue a refund. That reasoning would render the FCBA meaningless in every case where a merchant refuses to cooperate. Second, and critically, this dispute is not solely a service quality complaint. I provided Capital One with an invoice demonstrating that I was billed at a higher room rate than was appropriate for the inferior replacement room I received. That is a billing error ( an overcharge ) independent of any service quality judgment. Capital One acknowledged receipt of that invoice, was provided documentary proof of the overbilling, and has nonetheless declined to act on it. XXXX 's statement that Capital One is deferring to the merchant 's no-refund policy confirms that Capital One did not conduct any substantive analysis of the billing discrepancy I documented. Capital One chose to accept the merchant 's position wholesale without engaging the evidence submitted by the cardholder. XXXX. LEGAL BASIS FOR COMPLAINT Under the FCBA and Regulation Z, Capital One is required to conduct a reasonable investigation of a billing dispute and may not simply adopt the merchant 's position as its own without engaging the cardholder 's evidence. Capital One 's conduct here of two procedural closures citing missing documentation that were in fact provided, followed by a substantive denial based entirely on the merchant 's no-refund policy while ignoring documentary proof of overbilling, does not satisfy the reasonable investigation standard. Capital One 's handling of this dispute has resulted in my being held liable for {$2100.00} for services not delivered as represented, including a documented overcharge that Capital One has refused to address. IV. RELIEF REQUESTED I request that the CFPB : XXXX. Require Capital One to reopen dispute case no. XXXX and conduct a substantive investigation ; XXXX. Require Capital One to explain in writing why the invoice documenting the billing discrepancy was not treated as evidence of a billing error independent of the merchant 's no-refund policy ; XXXX. Require Capital One to explain what, if any, investigation was conducted beyond soliciting and accepting the merchant 's position ; 4. Issue a full chargeback of {$2100.00} ; and 5. Review Capital One 's dispute handling practices for compliance with FCBA and Regulation Z obligations. Supporting documentation available : photographs ( original room staining, replacement room, life-safety failures ), invoice showing overbilling, hotel written complaint, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Terms and Conditions, Capital One closure correspondence )

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation