Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Marcus by Goldman Sachs's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Marcus by Goldman Sachs has 3 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs

  11850 S Election Rd Draper, UT 84020-6887

  
• 

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs

  PO Box 45400 Salt Lake City, UT 84145-0400

  
• 

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs

  PO Box 1978 Cranberry Twp, PA 16066-0978

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/02/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I've been banking with Marcus for many years. The unpleasant experience started Feb 2024.I had a CD with Marcus maturing on 2/12/2024. At that time, I have options to either open an new CD with 5.40%APY, or instruct Marcus to renew the CD to another terms also with 5.40%APY. I contacted Marcus customer service ahead of time on 2/8/2024. Marcus representative on the phone told me clearly to go with "renewal" option and guaranteed with 5.4%APY, and said I always have 10days grace ****** to cancel the renewal if it did not turned out to be the correct APY.On 2/12/2024 I found the CD was renewed with a lower APY, I called Marcus right away and explained the situation. The representative gave a different story - CD is renewed at a lower rate and I DONT have any grace ****** to make changes. To close/change that CD, I was charged a penalty of $97.86. Not agreeing with the penalty I filed a custom complain and requested management review (Case#: ************).Got a call back from Marcus, a supervisor stated that after reviewing the audio scripts of 2/8/2024 phone call, it is clear the representative mis-informed about Marcus CD renewal guideline, they will follow up with that rep for training. And Marcus is willing to give me $25 for their mistake I rejected the $25 offer, stating that if it is Marcus mistake that caused a ~$100 damage on the customer end, ******************** needs to compensate the customer at least for that amount.It follows with many phone calls, complaints, and escalations - my record showed I have spoken to ~10 different managers which I have records with their names. On 3/12/2024, Marcus' rep named ******* called, and stated that after reviewing all the details, Marcus agreed to settle this with a $100 Goodwill credit to my amount, and I agreed.Many weeks passed, and this was no change to my amount, I called on 4/25/2024 and was very frustrated to find out that Marcus backoffice declined the $100 Goodwill due to their internal process, instead I was offered for $50. At that point I said no (complain #************), and decided to take this to BBB help for a resolution.My point and request is simple. This is no dispute that Marcus misguided customers and incurred a $97.86 charge. I am holding Marcus accountable to make this right and compensate its customer for financial damage and possibly all the time and emotions involved working on this case.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/09/2024

  BBB Response ****
  ID ********
  **********************, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank), received the above referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on May 3, 2024. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by *************** (the Customer) related to reimbursement of an Early Withdrawal Penalty (***) applied to their  Certificate of Deposit (CD).
  On January 30, 2024, the Customer provided the Bank with instructions to renew their CD into a 14-month term and withdraw a portion of the funds at maturity. In addition, the Bank sent a notification to the Customer confirming the instructions provided. As stated in the accounts disclosure, the CDs new Annual Percentage Yield (APY) will be determined at renewal and will be the highest APY Marcus offers on the Customers term during the ten days after maturity.
  On February 12, 2024, the CD renewed as requested by the Customer with the new rate available of 5.25% APY. Later that same day, the Customer contacted the Bank to inquire on the rate change and then requested to close their CD. The Bank specialist informed that an Early Withdrawal Penalty (***) would be applied for closing the account. The Customer agreed to the closure of the CD with the *** applied, which was successfully processed by the Bank the same day. However, the Customer requested the Bank to reimburse the *** charged on their CD.
  On March 12, 2024, the Bank contacted the Customer to advise that the Bank is unable to accommodate the Customers request for reimbursement on their ***. ********************* offered a credit as a token of good will, however, the Customer declined the offer.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/10/2024

   
  Complaint: 21659255
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Marcus response missed a very critical fact that Marcus representative misguided customer which resulted in this Early Withdrawal Penalty (***):  
  

  The online CD renewal instruction provided on Jan. 30th was a preliminary instruction.   According to Marcus rule, I can always change that instruction before the actual CD maturity date (Feb. 12, 2024).  
  
  On Feb. 8th, many banks including Marcus were still offering CDs with 5.40% APY.  I had options to close the existing CD at maturity, and open a new CD with 5.40% APY guaranteed for 10 days.  I called Marcus customer service, the representative told me to keep the CD renewal instruction as is, and reconfirmed the CD WILL be renewed at 5.40% APY.  The representative also stated that, if for any reason I am not satisfied with it, I have 10days grace ****** to cancel the CD renewed.  Marcus records all customer phone calls, and this Feb. 8th phone conversation was reviewed by Marcus with no dispute - Marcus admitted that the representative over phone provided incorrect information, misguided the customer and said to later reinforce training for customer service.

  On the renewal day, Feb. 12, 2024, the CD renewed at a wrong rate.  I called Marcus and was told the only option was to cancel the CD with Early Withdrawal Penalty (***).  I pointed to the Feb. 8th phone call, but was told that it needed to be reviewed.  A decision has to be made on the phone about the wrong CD, because the longer we drag on this, the higher *** would be.  The CD was closed with a note that the *** will be appealed.

  Over ~3 months now since that date, there were over 10 calls to Marcus and the case is still open.  Marcus offered goodwill of first $25, then $50  I would not accept anything less than what Marcus charged me.  Marcus at a minimum must credit me *** ($97.86) equivalent.
  

  How could Marcus charge its customer for a mistake started by ********************* representative?
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***************

  Business Response

  Date: 05/17/2024

  BBB Response ****
  ID ********
  **********************, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank), received the above referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on May 13, 2024. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the additional concerns raised by *************** (the Customer) related to reimbursement of an Early Withdrawal Penalty (***) applied to their Certificate of Deposit (CD).
  As stated in the Banks previous response, a CDs new Annual Percentage Yield (APY) will be determined at renewal and will be the highest APY Marcus offers on the Customers term during the ten days after maturity.
  On February 12, 2024, the CD renewed as requested by the Customer with the new rate available of 5.25% APY. Later that same day, the Customer contacted the Bank to inquire on the rate change and then requested to close their CD. The Bank specialist provided the Customer the *** the Bank charges on renewed CDs. The Customer agreed to the closure of the CD and the *** applied; however, the Customer later requested the Bank to reimburse the *** charged on their CD.
  On March 12, 2024, the Bank contacted the Customer to advise that the Bank is unable to accommodate the Customers request for reimbursement on their ***.Additionally, the Bank offered a credit as a token of good will, however, the Customer declined the offer.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/20/2024

   
  Complaint: 21659255
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  

  Marcuss May 20 response has nothing new from its May 10 response.  Marcus deliberately tried to avoid key facts of the complaint.  Let me make it clear by requesting Marcus to respond to my simply questions below:
  

  1. Does Marcus dispute the fact that its representative misguided customer on the CD renewal options and process during the February 8 phone call?  Can Marcus disclose the phone recording or transcripts?
  2. If Marcus does not dispute the fact above, how could Marcus charge its customer for a mistake started by ********************* representative?

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/01/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  For wire transfer, Marcus requires it can only be done by phone. We called Marcus to wire transfer our money to another bank amount so that we can pay down payment, we are 100% sure all account information and rounting information are correct when shared on the phone, but after 3 business days somehow the transfer was reversed with no explained reasons. We asked for record of wire transfer or history of actions taken from their end so we can verify if everything was entered correctly but Marcus cant provide. Marcus also dont allow wire transfer to our Escow directly since the money doesnt sit there for more than 90 days. We are now so close to the closing date that it impacts everything and will cause us significant cost and financial loss. It is absurd that Marcus keeps our money in their bank when we need the most it for a house.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/07/2024

  BBB *****
  ID ********
  **********************, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank), received the above-referenced
  complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on May 2, 2024. The Bank
  appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ******************* (the Joint Owner) related to
  a wire transfer from their ************** Account (OSA).
  On April 29, 2024, ************************* (the Primary Owner) contacted the Bank to request an outgoing wire
  transfer from their OSA to an external account. During the transfer processing review, the Bank identified
  security concerns regarding the ownership of the external account. Subsequently, a Bank specialist
  contacted the external institution to resolve the security concerns by verifying the ownership of the
  external account. After resolving the security concerns, the Bank processed the transfer request;
  however, the external institution reversed the transfer as they required additional instructions to process
  the request.
  On May 2, 2024, the Joint Owner contacted the Bank to re-initiate the outgoing wire transfer from their
  OSA to a separate external account which the Bank successfully processed the same day.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/01/2024

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  The account has been paid in full since December 10 2023 but the will not report paid to the credit reporting agency.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/08/2024

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank), received the above referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on May 1, 2024.  The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the issues raised by ************************* (the Customer) related to a personal loan (the Loan) serviced by Systems & Services Technologies,Inc. (SST)
  The Bank has confirmed the Loan was paid in full and apologizes for any inconvenience.
  SST has updated the account information with one or more *************************** to be accurate as of May 3, 2024.
  Please contact SST at ************** if there are any questions regarding the Loan.
  Based on the above details, we kindly request this complaint be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/01/2024

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  My wife and I were set to close a house and had major issues wiring the money. First, they don't allow wiring to external accounts meaning we could not send directly to the title company; we had to send the money to our regular checking first. However, one month before, I was able to wire transfer my ******* money deposit to escrow account without issues. They simply said I am no longer eligible for this service. So I initiated wire transfer to my regular checking account then. However, there was no movement on assets the day after. So I called in and talked to many representatives. Marcus Goldman Sachs put my funds on hold for 10 days for no reasons although they said there were no issues with our money and everything was cleared. No one can provide me reasons of this hold, status of this transfer or anything additional verifications they need. When I ask to withdraw any money, they will come up with all sort of made up reasons and delay our transfers. We missed our closing date despite initiating the wire two days before close.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/08/2024

  BBB Deposits Jiang

  ID ********

  Marcus by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank), received the above-referenced
  complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on May 1, 2024. The Bank
  appreciates the opportunity to address the additional concerns raised by ***************** (the Customer)
  related to the delay of an outgoing wire transfer from their ************** Account (OSA).
  On April 29, 2024, the Customer contacted the Bank to initiate an outgoing wire transfer from their OSA
  to a third party. In accordance with the Banks Deposit Account Agreement (DAA), the Bank could not
  honor the request to transfer funds to a third-party as the Bank requires transfers to be completed with
  an external account owned by the Customer. On the same call, the Customer then requested an
  outgoing wire transfer to their linked account. The Bank processed the outgoing wire transfer; however,
  due to a system issue, the transfer reversed to the Customers OSA.
  From May 1, 2024 to May 3, 2024, the Customer initiated multiple outgoing transfers from their OSA to
  a different linked account which the Bank successfully processed.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests that this complaint be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/30/2024

  Type:Customer Service Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Power of Attorney access - MARCUS by Goldman Sachs is required by law to review and reply regarding POA submission within 7 business days of filing submission under the WA State law the "Washington Uniform Power of Attorney Act (“The Act”) which became effective on January 1, 2017." I am legally my fathers POA and was helping him with bills/managing finances. I was locked out of his account when attempting to transfer money and began the POA access process at the end of January 2024. The POA paperwork that is required by MARCUS has the incorrect mailing address (which they still have not corrected) and the paperwork was lost in transit and finally returned to me a month later. Upon receiving I resent to the Utah address as provided by customer service. Once received I was told I needed to submit additional paperwork which was news to me as I had talked to MARCUS customer service representatives 4-5 times regarding access and they never mentioned it. I then submitted Affidavit and Indemnity of Attorney-in-fact as well as my legal POA documentation on March 28, 2024. I have yet to get POA access and it has been 3 weeks since it has been approved by the documents team and has been in legal review. I have been calling weekly for 3 months, sit on hold for it least and hour and have no resolution. I have been told there was a security concern based on being locked I assume, but my father had called and had it unlocked. MARCUS is legally obligated to give me a response and I have a serious lack of clarity as to why it is still in review and has "security" concerns. Based on other BBB reviews it seems this is a consistent excuse for their complete lack of communication, inept customer service and under staffing on the legal team. The customer service team is not trained to deal with these situations. I have asked for a call back 4 different times and have only received a message once, and was unable to get in direct contact as I am sent back once again to the general customer service number where I again start at square one.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/07/2024

  BBB Response **********
  ID ********
  Marcus by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the “Bank”), received the above-referenced
  complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on April 30, 2024. The Bank
  appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by **** ********** (the “Consumer”)
  related to accessing funds in an Online Savings Account (“OSA”) held for a third-party.
  According to the Bank’s records, a Power of Attorney was submitted for an account; however, the Bank
  was unable to approve the documentation. In addition, the Consumer does not have any active accounts
  or closed accounts in their name that connect to this complaint. For security purposes, the Bank is
  unable to share any details or account information with a third-party. If the Consumer has any questions
  or requires additional assistance, the Consumer may contact the Bank toll-free at ************** (1-
  ###-###-####), Monday to Friday, 8 am – 10 pm, or Saturday to Sunday, 9 am – 7 pm ET.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/29/2024

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I am not liable for this debt with GS BANK USA, I do not have a contract with Goldman Sachs Bank USA, they did not provide me with the original contract as i requested.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/06/2024

  Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to Apple Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on April 29, 2024. ******** appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ************************ (the Customer) related to a validation of the debt owed for the Apple ******************** conducted an investigation and confirmed no Bank error occurred. According to the Banks records, the Customer opened an Apple Card and consented to the Apple Card Customer Agreement on May 3, 2021. As stated in the Apple Card Customer Agreement, the Bank may report information about the account to the ************************** which includes but is not limited to Late Payments, Missed Payments, or other defaults on the account.
  ******** has no record of the Customer requested a validation of the debt owed prior to April 29, 2024. ******** sent the Customer the requested documents on April 30, 2024, validating the Customer's debt including a copy of the Apple Card Customer Agreement and 6 months of statement history showing records of transactions and payments to validate the balance and the debt owed. The Customer is responsible for the balance on the account in the amount of $6,735.28 provided in the latest statement from March 2023. The Bank is unable to remove the tradeline or inquiry from the Customers credit reporting.  ******** is unable to provide the Customer with signed documents as the Customer electronically consented to the Apple Card Customer Agreement by completing the application and opening the account.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/28/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Goldman Sachs claims to support SCRA however a majority of everyone that has applied has been denied the right to lower interest rates. They denied me saying I didnt have a card prior to service. In all actuality what 18 year coming out of high school can be approved for an Apple Card? Their policy for SCRA should be reviewed because its not actually supporting SCRA.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/06/2024

  Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to Apple Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on April 29, 2024. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ******************************* (the Customer) related to Servicemembers Civil Relief Acts (SCRA) benefits for Apple ******************** conducted an investigation and confirmed no Bank error occurred.  The Servicemembers Civil Relief Acts (SCRA) interest rate benefits cover financial obligations that were incurred prior to military service. Based on the documentation provided by the Customer, the Customers active duty start date of September 15, 2017, precedes the opening of the Apple Card account on June 17, 2023. The Bank confirmed the Customer is not eligible for a lower interest rate under the federal SCRA.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/26/2024

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  UNABLE TO LOG ON TO INTERNET PORTAL TO PROCESS TRANSACTIONS. THE ISSUE HAS BEEN WITHOUT RESOLUTION FOR 5 BUSINESS DAYS.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/02/2024

  BBB
  Response *****
  ********
  Marcus
  by Goldman Sachs, a brand of Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the “Bank”), received the
  above-referenced complaint via the Better Business Bureau Complaint Portal on
  April 26, 2024.  The Bank appreciates the
  opportunity to address the concerns raised by **** ***** (the “Customer”)
  related to accessing their Online Savings Account (“OSA”).
  On April 24, 2024, the Customer
  contacted the Bank and advised that they are experiencing difficulties logging
  into their OSA. As a result, the Bank opened an investigation into the
  Customer’s concerns. On April 26, 2024, the Bank contacted the Customer and assisted with troubleshooting steps.
  Subsequently, the Customer was able to
  access the online banking platform.
  
  Based on
  the above details, the Bank kindly requests this complaint to be closed. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/06/2024

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  The issue has not been resolved. I use Google Chrome and it will is the default browser on my PC. Chrome is the browser I used to open my Marcus accounts, make deposits and transfer funds to and from both accounts. Chrome is the ONLY browser I have used to access my Marcus user account until 2 weeks ago, April 22, 2024, when it began returning error messages during log in attempts.  

  The 1st response from MARCUS is not transparent and is an inaccurate representation, BECAUSE the issue with the Chrome browser WAS NOT resolved. Attached find a screen print of the portal login page from Marcus.com which has been taken at this time. Also during the process of dealing with Marcus technical representative it took 3 days and many telephone calls to reach an elevated level of MARCUS technical support. The elevated support person did NOT resolve the issue. After all the calls and 3 days of waiting for elevation of my issue I gave up. 

  I cannot accept the Marcus response as they DID NOT resolve the issue. The only response was to use other browsers, a mobile app and disable my Anti Virus software which is Avast.

  I don't use telephone apps. I did not open the account under the condition that I use other browsers and mobile apps to access my Marcus accounts on line.

  I do not use any browser other than Chrome. 

  Chrome is THE #1 browser, used worldwide and I need to continue using CHROME. I refuse to use a substitute which I am unfamiliar with and do not TRUST. I trust Chrome for VERY GOOD reasons.

  The MARCUS response is unacceptable. I will close my account and move my assets if not resolved. I WILL NOT remove my complaint with BBB as it 100% legitimate and 100% UNRESOLVED. 

  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  **** *****

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/26/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  About two months ago I purchased a iPhone using my GS credit card co branded with Apple. Before I made the final purchase I asked the rep if they had purchase protection. He said yes. My gf was with me and heard the conversation. Like AMEX or chase they offer protection vs theft, damage or lost items. He assured me it was all covered, quote, "not to worry"! In fact he went into details about the extended coverage. It was all not true. I should've confirmed it was true but I thought he seemed on the ball so I did not. I was willing to lose money of the transaction about $25 bc of a promo to get the protection. So I got the phone and activated it with my info. Then after a week I happened to check with GS on the protection. It was not covered. Thus I had to erase everything and start over. Send that one back and order another with AMEX. And then personalize the new phone. All taking a boat load of time.
  As far as supporting docs, I only have the fact I called apple and Goldman numerous times bc I was told someone could help me. I must admit I am tenacious so I went above and beyond. I figured a good compromise was provide Apple Care for 3-6 months. Which I doubt I would use anyway. Instead I kept getting hope from the initial reps that a supervisor could help me out and make it right. Btw AMEX card would stand behind their word even if a rep spoke incorrectly. I have phone records of the times I called both companies bc they are co-branded, Apple and Goldman Sachs credit card. I trusted both since they are well established. The phone records could be proof of the time I have spent trying to resolve the issue if needed.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/03/2024

  Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the “Bank”) received the above-referenced complaint
  related to Apple Card via the Better Business Bureau (“BBB”) Complaint Portal
  on April 26, 2024. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the
  concerns raised by ******* ****** (the “Customer”) related to Apple products.
  The Bank conducted an investigation and confirmed no Bank error occurred. The
  Bank conducted a review of interactions and was unable to locate any record
  of mistreatment or misinformation provided by a Bank representative. The
  Customer contacted the Bank on December 31, 2024, and was advised of the
  Bank's Zero Liability Protection benefit in case of any unauthorized
  transactions on the account. The Bank does not provide
  extended warranty or other protection and the Customer would need to contact
  the merchant related to any warranties. The Bank is
  unable to provide the Customer with compensation.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be
  closed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/03/2024

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Goldman Sachs is flat out lying. I have a witness. I was very clear when I spoke to them that they offered the protection or buyer protection plan.   Doesn’t surprise me that Goldman Sachs would lie it seems like everybody has the ability to just falsify information   I don’t have any proof it was a verbal Phone call only.  
  

  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ******* ******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/25/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Im not liable for this debt with APPLE CARD/GS BANK USA. I dont have any contracts with APPLE CARD/GS BANK USA. The account was paid in full. No collection agencies were involved.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/02/2024

  BBB Response Rejection #
  ******** # ******** RECEIVED DATE April 25, 2024
  Goldman Sachs Bank USA (the Bank) received the above-referenced complaint related to Apple Card via the Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaint Portal on April 25, 2024. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to address the concerns raised by ************************************* (the Customer) related to validation of the debt owed for the *********************** conducted an investigation and confirmed no Bank error occurred. According to the Banks records, the Customer opened the account on September 20, 2019. During the application process, the Customer is provided with and must consent to the Apple Card Customer Agreement, which discloses that the Customer agrees that the Bank may report information to the ************************* regarding the account, which includes but is not limited to Late Payments, Missed Payments, or other defaults on the account.
  The Bank sent the Customer documents on April 29, *************** the Customer's debt including a copy of the Apple Card Customer Agreement and all months of statement history showing records of transactions and payments to validate the balance and the debt owed. The Customer is responsible for the balance on the account in the amount of $2,848.63 provided in the latest statement from June 30, 2022. The Bank is obligated to report accurately to ************************* and is unable to update the Customers credit reporting.
  Based on the above details, the Bank kindly requests for this complaint to be closed.