Consumer complaint received 2021-04-01 00:00:00
Product: Credit card or prepaid 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern : On XX/XX/2021, I disputed a {$1700.00} charge by XXXX. I sent Citicard 6XXXX pages of evidence supporting our dispute. On XX/XX/2021, I sent a letter to Citicard to further explain the dispute. On XX/XX/2021, we provided additional evidence, and on XX/XX/2021, Citicard again stated we did not have evidence to support our claim. We are writing to you as the investigation was not thorough and did not take into account the information I provided. 

On XX/XX/2021, we booked a vacation home in XXXX, MT through XXXX. On XX/XX/2021 we canceled that trip as we realized the listing did not have the hot tub available as advertised on the mobile app. We booked through the XXXX mobile app which is advertised as " full featured '' and mentions one can " browse properties, plan with your group, and access your booking details anywhere - all from the app '', as well as " filter by what's important to you and your group : price, location, amenities, and more. '' After further filtering through consumer reviews ( as we were excited about the trip ), we found a consumer complaint that the hot tub was closed. We immediately contacted the owner who stated the hot tub was in fact closed. He supported this closure and not refunding us the full amount of our money by stating the hot tub description states that it is " seasonal '' in the listing. We endlessly searched the mobile app listing, and could not find this " seasonal '' commentary. We then looked on our laptop on the XXXX website that noted the " seasonal '' description. The mobile app was missing this description. We would not have completed this booking had we seen this description on the website on our laptop. We did not think we needed to double check the website as the XXXX mobile app again is advertised as full featured and that one can do anything on the app. 

The XXXX company also has a " Book with Confidence Guarantee ''. I was told by XXXX that a refund is not owed to us as we can find the information about the hot tub on the website. When we explained that the mobile app is advertised as " full featured '', the representative stated a hot tub is not a " crucial amenity ''. He stated the Book with Confidence Guarantee does not include the hot tub due to the " Material Non-Compliance '' section 3 of their Terms and Conditions that states, " a temporary defect of or within the subject property or attached services ( such as failure of the air conditioning, internet, phone service, grill, hot tub, or swimming pool ). '' However, the " seasonal '' description noted on the website is not a " temporary defect ''. It is a crucial description of an amenity left out by the mobile app. I can't emphasize enough that the hot tub was a must have in booking our trip, and we would not have booked the listing if we were privy to the information on the website. 

XXXX 's general Terms and Conditions also state, " If there are conflicts between the terms and conditions of the XXXX  site you found the property on and the terms and conditions of the HomeAway site you finalize the booking on, the terms and conditions of the XXXX site where the reservation is finalized will govern. '' Again, we finalized on the mobile app. 

We have sent the supporting evidence to Citicard as well as XXXX and the CEO of XXXX XXXX. We have been given credits of {$260.00} and {$120.00} by XXXX. We are still owed {$1300.00}. We were offered another {$300.00} as a final offer, but we did not take that because we are owed the remainder of our money in full due to the company mobile app error. 

Citicard failed us in their minimal investigation. We appealed the original dispute denial, but were denied again. Citicard simply presented the information from XXXX showing our payment, the cancellation policy, and the website 's " seasonal '' description. We are owed the refund due to the above evidence that the mobile app is missing information ( XXXX admitted this ) and the Book with Confidence Guarantee. We can attach and provide written evidence to all of the above. We realize we were outside the 60 day window for a full refund, but we were also misled by the mobile app and would not have booked this property had the amenities had their full descriptions. 

In order to again resolve this conflict after Citibank denied our claim, I made several other attempts to resolve the matter with XXXX. I have emailed XXXX XXXX, CEO of XXXX XXXX directly on XX/XX/2021 without response. I have asked to correspond to XXXX XXXX of XXXX directly without response. I was told by the XXXX " executive customer support '' representative on XX/XX/2021 that our case has been brought to the " Production and Feedback Teams '' but have not heard back since that email. I have emailed the XXXX " Executive Customer Support '', XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX on XX/XX/2021 asking when I should hear from the Production and Feedback Teams. I also asked for a copy of the Book with Confidence Guarantee Reimbursement Form, but I have not received a response from that XX/XX/2021 email. 

We are hoping you can help us retrieve our funds. We strongly oppose having to pay XXXX {$1000.00} for the error of the company. If a consumer must check a website to verify the information on the XXXX app, then there should be a statement informing the customer to refer to the website for full accurate information. 

Sincerely, XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX

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