Consumer complaint received 2026-01-26 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: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding Goldman Sachs Bank USAs improper handling of my Apple Card dispute for {$4700.00} related to auto repair services that were defective, negligently performed, and did not resolve the issue the repairs were billed for. 

The charge was for dealership auto repair services. After the repair, the original mechanical issue was not fixed, and the vehicle continued to misfire intermittently. Additionally, a slow engine leak was later discovered when I brought the vehicle in for a routine oil change. I have photographic evidence of this leak, as well as a written receipt from an independent mechanic confirming that the leak originated from the exact area of the engine that the dealership accessed during the disputed repair. This directly aligns with the dealerships own detailed repair invoice. 

Compounding the issue, when the dealership returned my vehicle to me after the repair, the headlights were not functioning, creating an unsafe and non-compliant driving condition. This defect prevented me from renewing my state vehicle inspection. When I notified the dealership, they refused to correct the issue unless I paid additional money, and instead attempted to charge approximately {$5000.00} more for further work. 

Ultimately, my independent mechanic resolved the headlight issue for {$80.00}, which was caused by a missing relay in the vehicles fuse box. This demonstrates that the dealership returned the vehicle to me in a defective and unsafe condition and then refused to correct their own error without additional payment. 

Due to the continued mechanical problems, the newly discovered engine leak, the unsafe condition of the vehicle upon return, and the dealerships attempt to charge additional money to address issues caused by their own work, it was not financially reasonable or safe for me to continue investing money into this vehicle. I ultimately had to dispose of the car rather than incur further financial loss. 



Improper Dispute Handling by Goldman Sachs Goldman Sachs repeatedly denied my dispute and re-investigations by stating that the goods or services were accurately represented and by improperly asserting that the goods were not returned. This reasoning is inapplicable and incorrect for an auto repair service dispute. 

This was not a retail goods return. The dispute is based on : Defective and negligent auto repair services Failure to repair the condition billed for Creation of additional defects Unsafe condition of the vehicle Resulting financial harm Return of goods is not a requirement for disputes involving defective services, particularly automotive repairs. By misclassifying this dispute and applying inappropriate standards, Goldman Sachs has failed to properly investigate this claim. 

Despite providing documentation and evidence, including proof of continued defects and third-party mechanical findings, Goldman Sachs has refused to conduct a fair and lawful review of the dispute.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation