Consumer complaint received 2025-11-06 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: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I filed XXXX separate billing-error disputes with Citibank ( Citi ) for charges from XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXr related to a long-term rental that began XX/XX/year>. 
My corporate account includes a 14 % recurring monthly discount, which failed to appear during booking due to a known system issue. 

I immediately contacted XXXX and received a written acknowledgment from their representative confirming that a technical issue prevented the corporate discount from displaying and that the credit would be applied at the end of the rental. Relying on this written assurance, I proceeded with the rental at the higher rate. When the rental ended, XXXX denied the issue existed and refused to issue the promised {$130.00} credit per rental period. 

Dispute XXXX : XX/XX/year> {$930.00} Dispute XXXX : XX/XX/year> {$930.00} Both disputes involve the same {$130.00} difference caused by XXXX system failure. 



What Citi Did Citi initially issued temporary credits for both months but later reversed them. For the first dispute, Citi provided me with the merchants chargeback rebuttalattached herewhich shows XXXX merely asserted that its rates were correct and that the corporate agreement was followed. There is no indication Citi independently reviewed my documentation or compared Sixts rebuttal to my written proof that the discount was never applied. 

When I called for clarification, a Citi agent told me, the merchant decided not to refund and theres nothing we can do. This response is not compliant with the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) and Regulation Z ( 12 C.F.R. 1026.13 ( e ) ( 3 ) ), which require the bank to conduct an independent, reasonable investigation and to provide a written statement of specific reasons for any denialnot to defer to the merchants refusal. 

For the second dispute, Citi closed the case without explanation, stating only : The documentation or facts provided do not support the billing-error dispute claim.

Why This Violates the Law The disputed charges constitute a billing error as defined in Reg Z 1026.13 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( an amount not in accordance with the terms of the agreement ). Sixts written assurance to apply the discount later modified the terms of the transaction.

Citi failed to perform a proper investigation, failed to evaluate my evidence, and failed to provide the specific written reasoning required by 1026.13 ( e ) ( 3 ) and 1666 ( a ) ( 3 ) ( B ).

Citis reliance on Sixts rebuttal letter ( attached, 13 pages ) demonstrates that it adopted the merchants narrative without assessing the customer documentation provided.

Pattern of Poor Handling This is the second CFPB complaint I have had to file in just six months as a Citi cardholder. That pattern reflects a systemic failure by Citi to comply with FCBA and Regulation Z dispute-handling standards.

Requested Outcome : Require Citi to reopen both disputes and conduct a legally compliant, independent investigation.

Require Citi to provide copies of all materials relied upon and a written explanation of its findings. 
Restore the {$130.00} credit for each month ( {$260.00} total ) or issue equivalent reimbursement for the improperly denied billing adjustments. 
Ensure Citi implements corrective procedures to prevent future XXXX violations affecting other consumers. 



Attachments Sixt chargeback rebuttal letter provided by Citi Citi denial letters for both disputes Email from XXXX agent acknowledging the system issue and promised credit Rental agreement showing no corporate discount was applied

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation