Consumer complaint received 2026-04-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — Store credit card
Issue: Closing your account — Company closed your account
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM Synchrony Bank reported a single 30-day late payment and then closed my XXXX charge account ( SYNCB/XXXX, account number beginning XXXX, statement account ends XXXX ). The XX/XX/XXXX billing statement for this account which is attached to this complaint shows that a {$1800.00} payment cleared successfully on XX/XX/XXXX, dramatically paying down the account balance. Despite this cleared payment, Synchrony closed the account to purchases on XX/XX/XXXX, one week after the payment cleared. On XX/XX/XXXX, Synchrony sent me a written account closure letter that does NOT cite any returned payment or NSF event. Instead, the letter states the closure was due to generic boilerplate reasons including " lack of recent activity, account upgrade, delinquencies, or the use of a Credit Consumer Counseling Service. '' None of these generic reasons is substantiated by my actual account activity. DOCUMENTED PAYMENT HISTORY FROM SYNCHRONY 'S OWN RECORDS The Synchrony billing statements for this account, which are attached to this complaint, show a consistent record of successful payments throughout XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX : Payment Thank You, {$360.00} cleared XX/XX/XXXX : Payment Thank You, {$600.00} cleared XX/XX/XXXX : Payment Thank You, {$370.00} cleared XX/XX/XXXX : Payment Thank You, {$400.00} cleared XX/XX/XXXX : Payment Thank You, {$370.00} cleared XX/XX/XXXX : Automatic Payment Thank You, {$250.00} cleared XX/XX/XXXX : Automatic Payment Thank You, {$250.00} cleared XX/XX/XXXX : Payment Thank You, {$1800.00} cleared ; balance reduced to approximately {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX : Synchrony closed the account to purchases XX/XX/XXXX : Synchrony 's written closure letter cites generic boilerplate reasons, not NSF Seven consecutive successful payments across eleven months, followed by a {$1800.00} payment that cleared and paid the account down to approximately {$2.00}, followed by account closure one week later. No returned-payment entry appears anywhere in the billing record. SYNCHRONY 'S XX/XX/XXXX CLOSURE LETTER NO RETURNED PAYMENT CITED On XX/XX/XXXX, Synchrony Customer Service sent me a written account closure letter regarding the XXXX account. That letter is attached to this complaint. Notably, it does not cite any returned-payment or NSF event . Instead, it offers a boilerplate list of " possible reasons '' : " lack of recent activity, account upgrade, delinquencies, or the use of a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. '' The letter does not specify which of these reasons applied to my account. None of the generic reasons listed is substantiated by my actual account activity. There was no lack of recent activity I had been making automatic payments through the account 's final months. There was no " account upgrade '' event. I have not used a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. And to the extent Synchrony is claiming " delinquencies, '' its own billing statements do not show any returned-payment event. BANK BALANCE EVIDENCE ( XXXX VERIFICATION LETTER ) The following balances on my XXXX personal checking account ( ending XXXX ) are documented in a verification letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, signed by Banking Officer XXXX XXXX ( NMLS ID XXXX ), which is attached to this complaint : XX/XX/XXXX : {$47000.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$66000.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$43000.00} The automatic payment drafts on this account during XXXX were {$250.00} or less. No insufficient-funds condition could have existed at any point during the period at issue. WHY THE LATE MARK AND CLOSURE ARE UNSUBSTANTIATED Synchrony has not produced any documentation of a specific returned-payment event on this account. The single 30-day late mark reported to the credit bureaus for XX/XX/XXXX is unsupported by Synchrony 's own billing and closure records. PRIOR CORRESPONDENCE WITH SYNCHRONY I previously sent Synchrony a written reinstatement request, with the XXXX verification letter attached, asking them to reconsider the closure and correct the credit reporting. Synchrony 's response was a generic form letter that did not address the bank verification, did not identify any specific returned-payment event, and did not conduct any substantive investigation. LEGAL FRAMING Synchrony 's failure to meaningfully investigate this dispute, despite receiving direct bank verification and despite the absence of any documented returned-payment event in its own closure letter or billing records, is inconsistent with its obligations as a furnisher of information under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ). Under FCRA Section 623 ( b ), a furnisher that receives notice of a dispute is required to conduct a reasonable investigation and report the results. A form-letter response that does not engage with the specific bank evidence provided does not satisfy that standard.

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