Consumer complaint received 2016-12-12 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting — 
Issue: Credit monitoring or identity protection — Billing dispute
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX I attempted to lift the freeze on my credit report with Equifax. I had done the same thing with XXXX approximately eleven days earlier and with XXXX later XX/XX/XXXX. I tried repeatedly to use the Equifax website in order to lift the freeze but their site would not allow me to complete to request. After numerous attempts, I called and with the assistance of one of their representatives, got the freeze lifted. At this point I was told that the lift would cost {$10.00} and I provided the appropriate credit card information to complete the transaction. 
On the billing statement of my VISA card for that billing cycle I found that I had been billed {$10.00} by Equifax a total of eight times that day. When I contacted Equifax to advise them of their billing mistake I was told that I would need to submit a copy of my credit card statement to them for their review. I told them that there was no need for me to submit evidence to them as their own billing department already has information that they had billed me and it is obvious that that I would not have requested a freeze lift eight times in the same day! I asked that they simply refund the {$70.00} to my credit card. The representative simply refused to differ from what he had previously stated. I then requested to speak to his supervisor. After being place on hold for an extended period of time the supervisor who identified himself as XXXX ( ID # XXXX ) told me that the only way to receive a refund was by sending a copy of my statement for their review. I was told that I had, via their website, made all the lift transactions therefore I should provide evidence and request a refund. 
I think that it is ironic that prior to my being connected to a representative in the first place, I was asked if I would be willing to participate in a survey as to their performance. At that time I did in fact pressed one, indicating that I would participate in the survey. Had I been given the survey following these conversations I would have explained just how poor a job they were doing! How I felt that they were not taking responsibility for their mistakes. How they force the consumer to prove that they are inept. Strangely enough, in this case, after finishing the call I was not surveyed! Ironic is n't it! This is an organization with incredible control of people 's financial lives yet are clearly not responsible for the their own failures. If this had happened to someone else with lesser, shall we say more delicate financial resources the results could have been very damaging! They could have been unable to pay! Ironically resulting in damage to their credit rating! All caused by a reporting agency itself! By the way, I had no such problem with XXXX of XXXX. 
Equifax has all the records that are needed to both document, understand and resolve this entire incident. 
Additionally, on the very same day my wife was have freezes lifted from her credit reports. After seeing the trouble I had with the Equifax website she chose to just handle it by phone. The freeze was lifted. When reviewing her next credit card statement she had been billed multiple times as well! She did n't even use the website! Her transaction was all handled by a representative of Equifax. How often does this happen? How often do consumers simply not notice these billing errors? How many times do consumers simply not care to complete the refund process? How much revenue can be generated by collecting money and earning a return on the " float '' for the weeks or months that it make take to receive a refund. Or is it possible that this is simply a mistake by an irresponsible organization with too much power? 
I demand that either my {$70.00} be refunded or that Equifax produce evidence that I did in fact receive each of the alleged XXXX different freeze lifts that I " requested '' and was subsequently billed for.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation