Consumer complaint received 2026-05-28 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: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
To : USAA Office of the CEO USAA Senior Executive Resolution Specialist, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau National Credit Union Association RE : Reasonable investigation not conducted Case XXXX Transaction Date : XX/XX/year> Transaction Amount : {$5000.00} Merchant Name : XXXX XXXX Dispute Type : Merchandise Not as Described/ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX billing error goods or services not delivered as agreed 1026.12 Right of cardholder to assert claims or defenses against card 1026.12 ( c ) ( Regulation Z ) & XXXX Global Rules I am requesting USAA Office of the CEO or an USAA Senior Executive Resolution Specialist conduct a thorough reasonable investigation. I am extremely disappointed that a company who claims to protect its members against fraud did not live up to its standards. I disputed a transaction after being sold FRAUDULENT GOODS not as described and provided an abundance of undeniable evidence to support my claim under REG Z 1026.13 Billing error good and services not delivered as agreed. USAA failed to properly provide a reasonable investigation for my dispute as required. It appears the USAA analyst may have decisioned my complaint under REG E debit card transaction in error and not REG Z. I provided professional evidence and pictures of what was sold to me and USAA responded with an unacceptable explanation. The notice of explanation stated USAA denied my dispute because " you participated in the transaction ''. The merchant 's response only included : a copy of the merchant 's receipt, a picture of my license, and a picture of me buying the jewelry, which is totally irrelevant. The merchant also supplied their store policy that is not on the receipt provided to me or to USAA, also making this irrelevant. Regardless, the merchant 's very aggressive store policy that mentioned XXXX returns is irrelevant to this claim because its a claim of counterfeit jewelry. How does the documents submitted by the merchant support me agreeing to buy FAKE COUNTERFEIT gold jewelry. The agreement between me and the merchant was to purchase XXXX XXXX solid gold chain and XXXX XXXX sold gold bracelet, Not copper. This was intentional fraud My dispute document that I provided USAA included the receipt, an appraisal from the XXXX XXXX, and pictures. The dispute is not identity theft, It is that I did not receive the goods or service that the merchant agreed to provide. Therefore, what did USAA investigate? Will USAA defend its agreement with the merchant that it is reasonable for someone to pay {$5000.00} worth of copper jewelry that is worth only {$75.00}. Did the merchant even address the fake jewelry it sold me in its response? Is it reasonable to have jewelry authenticated within XXXX hours, while on a cruise ship in another country? A reasonable investigation also requires that you Read the actual appraisal of what was sold. Read the copy of the receipt provide to the consumer. that doesn't contain a refund policy. What does XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Please see the very detailed description of the incident below. Description of Incident : On XX/XX/year> while at the XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I visited the merchant listed above. The salesman verbally represented XXXX jewelry items as being XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX chain and XXXX bracelet. Relying on this information and the XXXX gold stamp, I agreed to purchase the items for XXXX. No one would knowingly pay this absorbent amount for $ XXXX {$60.00} worth of copper. This is intentional fraud. Please refer to my many years of exceptional credit history and financial responsibility. I couldnt find a phone number or email address to contact this merchant. I have witnesses who will verify the salesmans verbal confirmation of XXXX gold. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX. Inducement by Deception : The merchant provided a vague, non-itemized receipt that deliberately omitted material specifications ( XXXX XXXX ) to obscure the nature of the transaction. This is a violation of transparency requirements under XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ). The high purchase price clearly reflects a contract for solid gold, not base metals, including copper. XXXX. Professional Authentication : Upon returning home, I had the merchandise professionally tested on XX/XX/year> at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I submitted formal documentation from the XXXX XXXX confirming that the items are not XXXX gold but are instead composed of copper. XXXX. Legal Assertion : I am asserting my rights under XXXX XXXX XXXX ( c ) ( Regulation Z ), which allows a cardholder to assert claims and defenses against a card issuer for a merchants failure to resolve a dispute concerning the quality of goods. Furthermore, under XXXX Global Dispute Rules ( Reason Code 13.3 / 4853 ), I am providing the required third-party evidence that the merchandise is counterfeit and not as described. Disposition of Merchandise : The merchandise is currently being appraised by a jeweler and will be back in my possession in a few days. I will submit the appraisal as evidence of this intentional fraud. I am willing to return the items to the merchant upon receipt of a pre-paid shipping label and confirmation of a full refund. ( Charge-back ) Requested Action : USAA to conduct a REASONABLE INVESTIGATION AND Reverse the dispute denial. Because the merchant engaged in a " Bait and Switch '' and provided goods with XXXX intrinsic value, I request a permanent reversal of this charge.

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