Consumer complaint received 2026-01-21 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: PENTAGON FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint to report Pentagon Federal Credit Union ( PenFed ) for what I believe is improper mishandling of my consumer disputes and chargeback requests related to multiple transactions made between approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX  involving online sweepstakes casino merchants. They have own right refused to investigate, I was notified by a XXXX XXXX that works in CARD services who is instructed by Pentagon Federal credit union to not investigate my disputes, they will not provide any documentation, they wont provide the required requested documents Ive asked for which I believe I have rights to review, including all evidence reviewed, all evidence not reviewed, a copy of the merchants position, how they arrive to their decision, the credit card rules, and exclamation as to why they close my account based on unsound judgment when they authorized every transaction. Authorization was either by text message, or phone call or I did not disguise or lie as to what type of app I was on they were fully aware, and then when I discovered their illegality, meaning the sites represented themselves as legal, and in fact, were illegal, therefore not allowing me to get the goods that I thought I was purchasing and agreed to purchase. Those being legal, virtual coin/entertainment when in fact I was sold illegal counterfeit/entertainment. Its impossible to get what you agreed to pay for when they, the merchants disguise, their legal status and their terms of service, in their live chats, and in while enrolling always given the presentation that they are legal and not prohibited in Minnesota. Frankly and undisputedly summed up is, I would never agree to purchase illegal goods or services or products. I was scammed, and I relied on the federal protections and consumer protections available to me where Ive been completely ignored, had my account closed, and complete lack of response as well as complete disregard for my protections and rights as a consumer. 
However, the Attorney General came out and said that they are in fact illegal, and Ive been working with law-enforcement, Special Agent with XXXX AGE, filed a complaint with the Attorney General, and the FTC. XXXX disclosed to law-enforcement, as soon as I learned these sites were illegal. And submitted chargeback disputes for the legal services that were sold to me under the premise of being legal. 

These merchants marketed and represented their services in a manner that induced purchases under the impression of lawful entertainment. I later discovered information and enforcement warnings indicating these operators are not lawful/regulated in Minnesota and may be operating as illegal gambling or illegal lottery activity. 

XXXX has failed to conduct a fair, unbiased, complete investigation, has closed disputes without meaningful review, has demanded unreasonable/impossible documentation, and has obstructed my ability to obtain chargeback remedies and dispute appeal rights regarding the XXXX complaint which had to do with the same merchants however, at that time, I didnt know they were illegal, so it was just a double billing dispute due to the number of charges that I did not recognize. They provide provided nothing to the XX/XX/year> complaint which was an amended complaint as soon as I learned the companies were operating illegally. 

B. Transaction Window and Dispute Trigger Transactions occurred approximately XXXX XXXX, including XXXX Pay transactions. 
I initiated disputes around early XX/XX/year>, after learning of the alleged illegality/misrepresentation and after making reports/complaints. 
This dispute is not buyers remorse. It is based on misrepresentation, deceptive conduct, and illegal/unregulated activity that materially altered the nature of what I believed I was purchasing. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : Misrepresentation / Goods Not as Described The controlling basis of my dispute is misrepresentation : the merchants represented the services as lawful/available entertainment, when Minnesota authorities have publicly warned that these online gambling/sweepstakes operations are unlawful and unregulated. 

My dispute basis includes : Misrepresentation of legality and inducement into transactions that are void/unfair Goods/services not as described ( illegal gambling instruments sold as lawful entertainment ) Duplicate processing/double billing ( where applicable ) Misleading billing descriptors and other fraud indicators ( where applicable ) D. PenFeds Improper Conduct ( Complaint Allegations ) PenFeds conduct includes, but is not limited to : 1. Failure to conduct a reasonable investigati

on PenFed closed disputes and/or denied disputes without a complete review of evidence and without issuing a fair written rationale tied to the substance of the dispute.

2. Improper closure of disputes / inconsistent handling PenFed has issued inconsistent and contradictory communications regarding dispute status and handling, creating an obstructive process rather than a compliant investigation. 
XXXX. Unreasonable documentation demands/ impossible requirements PenFed directing me to return to websites that are allegedly illegal or websites from which I have been banned, and then using that as a basis to deny claims. In a prior dispute related on by merchants. In XXXX billing error dispute was closed, however, after learning the sites were illegal I submitted another dispute in XX/XX/year>, which they have outright ignored, refused to investigate and are unwilling to cooperate whatsoever in providing me requested documents. Such as evidence they reviewed they considered, evidence they didnt review didnt consider, instructions as to how they derived their decision and several other requests that have gone ignored. 
XXXX. Failure to evaluate disputes under proper misrepresentation frameworks My disputes involve misrepresentation and illegal/unregulated activity. PenFed has treated them as routine authorized transactions and refused to evaluate them under a consumer-protection framework consistent with misrepresentation and goods/services not as described.

5. Failure to provide transparent evidence review and appeal process I requested all documentation and information PenFed relied on to deny disputes, along with appeal instructions. PenFed has not provided adequate transparency or a meaningful appeal pathway. 
XXXX. Refusal to treat credit and debit disputes consistently As originally reported in early XXXX, these disputes involve both credit and debit card transactions, and XXXX handling has failed to address the full scope. 

XXXX Harm to Consumer PenFeds mishandling has caused : ongoing financial loss and inability to recover disputed funds prolonged administrative burden and repeated follow-ups denial of fair dispute resolution procedures severe stress and ongoing uncertainty F. Relief Requested I request that the FTC : 1. Review PenFeds dispute/chargeback practices for unfair handling and obstruction of consumer remedies.

2. Require PenFed to provide the full dispute investigation file ( all evidence reviewed, communications, decision rationale, and internal notes where applicable ).

3. Require PenFed to provide a compliant appeal process and re-evaluate disputes under misrepresentation / goods not as described frameworks.

4. Require PenFed to issue written findings and consistent procedures for disputes involving illegal/unregulated merchant conduct. 
XXXX. Allow me my right to arbitration which Ive requested multiple times. 
XXXX Review all evidence Ive uploaded to their secure message portal. 
XXXX. Stop impeding on my consumer protection, federal law, and state law, consumer rights, and protections. 

XXXX Supporting Evidence Available I can provide : dispute letters and appeal submissions formal notice narrative with Minnesota enforcement quotations screenshots of marketing claims ( e.g., No purchase necessary ) Minnesota enforcement warning screenshot ( ag.state.mn.us ) ( uploaded image ) proof of FTC reporting confirmation and case reference screenshots Electronic Signature : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

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