Consumer complaint received 2025-10-29 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: BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
Barclays Bank Delaware mishandled my billing-error dispute for charges from XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX I hired this merchant for a full-service household move that included packing, transport, and placement of furniture, which they failed to perform as agreed. The owner confirmed by text that it was a full pack job. The crew worked July 2324, 2025 but left many boxes incomplete, furniture unwrapped, and items damaged. I even had to pack the entire XXXX floor myself, despite caring for my XXXX husband which was the very reason I hired a full service moving company in the first place. This dispute has nothing to do with the amount charged ; the company could have charged me any fair price and supplied enough people to complete the job as contracted. The issue is they failed to provide the services I paid for and later falsified paperwork to appear as though they had. Barclays had more than XXXX pages of documentation from me, including text messages with the owner confirming the scope of work and my repeated statements that price was not the issue I simply wanted the job completed correctly. Despite having all of this evidence, Barclays ignored it and accepted the merchants falsified records instead. 

I had to hire another moving company to complete the work at my own expense. The second mover later provided a letter confirming they found belongings disassembled, poorly packed, and damaged, and that they had to finish the move themselves. 

I filed a billing-error dispute with Barclays and provided extensive documentationcontract and estimate pages describing full packing, date-stamped photos showing incomplete work, and written communications documenting the problem. Barclays denied the dispute on XX/XX/year>, claiming there was insufficient proof that the merchant violated the contract. 

After I asked that the case be reopened, Barclays issued another denial on XXXX XXXXonly XXXX days laterwithout referencing any of my evidence. The merchant had produced falsified documents, including a Pre-Existing Furniture/Post-Load Walk-Through form dated XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX PM, even though the job actually ended around XXXX AM, and a new invoice created XX/XX/year>, XXXX weeks after the move. This XX/XX/XXXX document was the first and only invoice ever madethe merchant had never issued XXXX before and created it solely after the dispute was filed. The identical timestamp on the XX/XX/XXXX form shows that entry was not a clerical error but a deliberate falsification designed to appear contemporaneous. Barclays accepted both of these fabricated materials as valid and ignored the evidence I provided. 

This case is not a simple service complaint, but a clear example of merchant fraud compounded by a banks failure to investigate. Barclays accepted documents that could not possibly have been created at the time of service and failed to cross-check dates and metadata that clearly disproved them. The evidence shows intentional falsification by the merchant and procedural negligence by Barclays. 

Because Barclays itself states that investigations typically take 6090 days, closing a reopened case in only XXXX days without verifying documentation falls far short of a reasonable investigation under Regulation Z ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and the Fair Credit Billing Act. 

All supporting documentation ( Exhibits XXXX ) is attached in the PDF titled CFPB_Dispute_Barclays_Full_Evidence_Packet.pdf.

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