An official website of the United States Government

Meet Jonna from Texas

By

Since we launched on July 21st 2011, we’ve heard directly from consumers about the challenges they face in the marketplace, brought their concerns to the attention of financial institutions, and helped address their complaints. Accepting, resolving, and analyzing consumer complaints is an integral part of our work.

Periodically, we’ll feature stories from consumers who we have helped, and who have agreed to let the CFPB make their stories public.

Jonna, a 53-year-old legal assistant from Texas, was accruing high fees on her credit card because of a card issuer computer glitch.

The problems started in August 2011 when Jonna says she tried to pay $200 toward her $3,100 credit card debt but a malfunction of the credit card issuer’s website instead caused a $3,100 withdrawal from her bank account. That malfunction resulted in an overdraft charge from her bank and a charge of $25 from the card issuer for a bounced payment.

After repeated phone calls to customer service, the card issuer finally straightened out the amount that Jonna had wanted to pay but accidentally put the $3,100 balance as cash advance charges, which have a higher interest rate than purchases. Interest owed was ratcheting up fast. The fees grew to $345 before the issuer agreed to return the balance to the purchased category.

When Jonna contacted the CFPB in May 2012 she says there was still an erroneous cash advance balance on her card, extra fees were still being charged, and the issuer still had failed to reimburse her for the mistaken interest charged while the balance was in the higher-interest cash advanced category. Within a week after the CFPB got involved, the credit card issuer corrected all their errors. And, although the issuer could not refund Jonna for the insufficient fund charges from her bank, it sent Jonna a gift card for a national retail outlet.

Learn more

To see more about how we handle consumer complaints, read our Consumer Response Snapshot and to see all credit card complaints, visit our consumer complaint database.

  • Randysnr

    I recently opened a credit card account with Capital One.  When I called to activate the card, they activated.  That was it, no pitch for this, that and the other worthless thing.  What a breath of fresh air.  I had a Capital One card several tears ago and I closed it because of all the sales pitches.  I think this recent development is the result of your agency.  More power to you, and thank you to Elizabeth Warren and the rest of your dedicated staff.  You have the support of your citizens.

  • Assetback

    Bravo. Next time, I think punitive awards should also be built into regulations relating to these types of complaints. A gift card should not suffice for the stress consumers are put under in these circumstances, given that once the CFPB got involved, it only took a week to rectify the situation. Punitives aways get the attention of management.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LOUGVBAARJ5ULOPLCE23M4OLI4 abayomi

    I support Assetback’s remarks wholly. Besides, why would the credit card issuer be audacious enough to think a gift card even on a ‘global’ retail outlet was due recompense for a victim’s loss in insufficient bank charges instigated by the card issuer’s negligence? In the circumstance, the full $25 bank charge should have been refunded to the victim, with apology to boot. Where there has been wanton conduct or proven track record of a credit card issuer’s systemic shortchanging of members of the public on grounds of deception, negligence or res ipsa loquitur, the issuer should be slapped with punitive damages in addition to any general damages which the victim (complainant or plaintiff) might be awarded. 

    I support capitalism, but one with a human face and a heart of equity. It is about time we chased out those giving capitalism a bad name. This is one more good reason that we as members of the public must give the CFPB all the support and encouragement it deserves to keep playing its watchdog role. Opportunistic members of the public must equally not be allowed to rubbish the names and corporate brands of responsible businesses. Equity must travel both ways.     

  • Straw9494

    you realize that she clicked the wrong button when it asked if she would like to pay the minimum, the balance or a different amount.  Human error, not a computer glitch.

  • Straw9494

    you realize that she clicked the wrong button when it asked if she would like to pay the minimum, the balance or a different amount.  Human error, not a computer glitch.

  • Trevor

    I agree with straw9494, it was probably human error. However, if this was a computer glitch, then I applaud the CFPB. This is the kind of thing the CFPB should get involved with. The post about Julio from Florida is ridiculous. The CFPB needs to promote personal financial responsiblity, and not bail out people who act recklessly.

The CFPB blog aims to facilitate conversations about our work. We want your comments to drive this conversation. Please be courteous, constructive, and on-topic. To help make the conversation productive, we encourage you to read our comment policy before posting. Comments on any post remain open for seven days from the date it was posted.