Consumer complaint received 2026-02-09 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit 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: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint because Synchrony Bank repeatedly failed to properly investigate a legitimate billing dispute. The credit card in question was issued specifically for financing the XXXX XXXX XXXX, giving Synchrony a clear financial incentive to side with the vendor. Despite my detailed submissions and repeated explanations, Synchrony ignored my evidence, relied on false statements from the vendor, and closed my dispute multiple times without a proper review, in direct violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act and Regulation Z. 

XX/XX/XXXX : The vendor issued a partial refund of {$1800.00} related to a {$4200.00} charge. This refund did not resolve the dispute. 

XX/XX/XXXX : I submitted a dispute to Synchrony for an additional {$1300.00} on top of the {$1800.00} refund from XX/XX/XXXX, of the {$4200.00} charge and provided XXXX supporting documents. This amount represented an additional refund sought as part of an amicable settlement, for a total requested refund of {$3100.00} of the {$4200.00} charge. My documentation clearly explained this structure and distinction. 

XX/XX/XXXX : Synchrony closed my dispute as approved, stating that a credit had been issued on XX/XX/XXXX. This was incorrect. The {$1800.00} refund issued on XX/XX/XXXX was a partial refund and did not represent the additional {$1300.00} I was disputing. My dispute documentation clearly distinguished between these amounts. 

XX/XX/XXXX : During a live chat with a Synchrony customer service representative, I explained that my dispute had not been reviewed correctly, including that the {$1800.00} refund was a partial refund and that my dispute concerned an additional {$1300.00} which I would have been willing to accept as an amicable settlement. The representative acknowledged this and reopened the dispute on my behalf. I was explicitly advised that I did not need to resubmit my supporting documentation because it was already on file. 

XX/XX/XXXX : Synchrony closed the second dispute in favor of the vendor, stating that I failed to provide supporting documentation and citing the vendors submission as accurate. This was incorrect, as I had relied on the direction of the Synchrony XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and did not resubmit my evidence because I was explicitly told that it was not necessary. I had already provided full documentation on XX/XX/XXXX. 

After the closure, I called Synchrony to discuss the decision. A representative stated that the closure was based on the fact that I had signed a service contract. However, signing a service contract does not automatically make me liable for the disputed amount, especially because the vendor, XXXX XXXX, attempted to rely on a clause that did not apply to my situation and lied about why the contract was terminated. Synchrony failed to independently verify the facts and improperly accepted the vendors misrepresentations. 

XX/XX/XXXX : I consulted local attorney XXXX XXXX to review the service agreement relied upon by Synchrony. XXXX XXXX confirmed that the vendor was attempting to rely on a clause not applicable to my situation and advised me to reopen my dispute. 
That same day, I reopened my dispute with Synchrony and submitted a detailed letter and supporting documentation explaining that I was legally entitled to the remaining {$2300.00} of the initial {$4200.00} charge due to the termination of my service agreement with XXXX XXXX. I also provided evidence that the vendor had submitted false information to Synchrony, and a detailed line item dispute for the balance being disputed. 

XX/XX/XXXX : Synchrony closed my dispute again, saying it was approved because of the XX/XX/XXXX, refund. However, that refund was only {$1800.00}, had already been issued, and did not cover the amount I was still disputing. I had already informed Synchrony on XX/XX/XXXX, during a live chat, that this was incorrect and that my dispute involved an additional amount. 
I had submitted a detailed letter and supporting documentation on XX/XX/XXXX, after consulting with an attorney, showing that I was legally entitled to the remaining {$2300.00} of the charge. Synchrony did not review any of the documents I submitted on XX/XX/XXXX. 

When I requested the evidence or documentation used to make this determination in a live chat today, I was told that Synchrony could not provide any information or assistance, further demonstrating a lack of transparency and failure to properly handle the dispute.

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