Consumer complaint received 2020-06-16 00:00:00
Product: Credit card or prepaid card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers — Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I was reviewing my Citi XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mastercard monthly credit card statement in detail ( an account I canceled several years ago but continue to attempt to pay it off ) and noticed that I was being charged for something called " Payment Safeguard - Protection for your account! '' I never signed up for this Payment Safeguard protection - not via phone, e-mail, online, etc. - and just happened to notice it this time because, with the current pandemic and stressful financial times, I am reviewing my finances in greater detail. The next day ( XX/XX/XXXX ), I used Citibank 's customer service CHAT window to lodge a complaint and file a dispute. After making initial contact, I got routed to a " XXXX '' where I explained my concerns. XXXX routed me to a " XXXX '' where I had to re-explain my concerns. XXXX informed me that Citibank has a " separate and dedicated department '' to deal with such cases and gave me a phone number to call of XXXX. I cut-and-pasted the entire chat and have it in print. Before calling this new number, I decided to go back through each of the monthly records I had dating back to XXXX ... and I noticed that each month, I had been charged for this Payment Safeguard protection. I tried totaling up how much I had been charged and stopped researching when the amount approached {$9700.00}! I, then, decided to look online to see if similar complaints had been logged for similar reasons, and that's when I found your CFPB article ( https : //www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-orders-citibank-to-pay-700-million-in-consumer-relief-for-illegal-credit-card-practices/ ). From there, I called this Payment Safeguard Customer Service number that same day. Once getting to someone live via phone, I wound up talking to a " XXXX, '' who was very pleasant, where I again explained my situation and desire to file a dispute. XXXX was understanding ... and, to my surprise, she told me that her records show I had been charged for this Payment Safeguard protection dating back to XX/XX/XXXX! XXXX filed my dispute, gave me a confirmation number, and told me it could take up to 30 days for Citibank to review and that I should receive something in the mail and/or see a credit to my account. XXXX also asked if I wanted to terminate this Payment Safeguard protection ( which I did ) and mentioned that I should receive something in the mail to confirm termination ( which I have, dated XX/XX/XXXX ). I asked XXXX if I should call back in 30 days if I have not received any follow up on my dispute and she said I should. After getting off the phone with XXXX, I decided to request my records from Citibank dating back to XXXX of XX/XX/XXXXand now have proof of having been charged for this Payment Safeguard protection that I never signed up for back to the Summer of XXXX, confirming XXXX 's statement! By my estimates, it appears Citibank may, in fact, owe me an amount approaching {$20000.00}! What I currently owe on this closed account is about half this amount! Wanting to check on the status sooner, I called again on XX/XX/XXXX, and was told by a " XXXX '' that I needed to wait until 30 days had passed before following up. Today, XX/XX/XXXX, 32 days after my initial call, I called again to follow up, this time eventually being routed to an " XXXX '' ( I believe ). XXXX told me that she doesn't have an update for me and that she could file a second dispute. I asked how long it might be to hear back after filing my second dispute and she told me up to another 30 days. As I thought that to be unacceptable, I politely asked to speak with a supervisor and was connected to a " XXXX. '' XXXX was also pleasant, but proceeded to tell me that she would file a second dispute, and also suggested that it could take another 30 days for a response, but that the second dispute filing would trigger an expedited process to find out what the status is. I asked if I should call back in another 2 weeks and she suggested that might be a good idea. I find this totally unacceptable, especially considering that nothing appears to have been researched on this in the initial 30 days. I am an understanding person, and realize that the current pandemic has people working from home and this could delay or prolong follow up efforts, but we're talking a lot of money here that I am potentially owed by Citibank for deceptive practices, such practices that others have obviously had to endure in the past, and especially when I continue to try to pay them on my current balance. I'm paying them when it looks like they should be paying me back a substantial amount!

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