A court ruling stops a bank claiming unknown credit card usage

The judiciary stopped a bank from attempting to collect on an unknown card debt because the explanation given to the customer was inadequate

12/17/2025 – 10:37 am

The Lomas de Zamora Civil and Commercial Court of Appeal blocked the a bank claim the consumption in court Credit card challenged by the owner. The controversy arose from an accusation of almost $3,000 carried out on one platform Rental of tourist accommodationwhose authorship was unknown

A claim without a clear answer

According to the file, the cardholder had complained about the consumption within the legal deadlines. However, The bank limited itself to a brief note in the monthly summary.

“The only information provided by the bank to resolve the claim made by the Amex cardholder consisted of a short legend in the summary, which was limited to the following: “AIRBNB (own verified consumption)'”, the sentence highlighted. This mention is not enough for the court to consider the challenge answered.

Why did the executive route fail?

The chambermaids assumed that the financial institution had not met the requirements set out therein Credit card law. In particular, they pointed out that he had not provided any documents or reasons to support the charge in question.

“This legend is clearly not enough to consider that the banking institution’s obligation has been fulfilled. to adequately explain the accuracy of the settlement and provide a copy of the receipts or evidence supporting it,” they claimed.

An explanation is “hidden” in the summary.

The judges Javier Rodino And Carlos Igoldi They were even tougher when analyzing the bank’s behavior. They stated that the alleged reaction was hidden in the details of consumption:

“The issuing bank limited itself to inserting a minimal, ambiguous and inaccurate reference to the claim, hidden in the consumption information; which is unacceptable.”.

User rights violated

This approach has a direct impact on the customer’s guarantees.

“This defect not only violates the provisions of the Article 27 of the law, but also deprived the executed person of the exercise of the privilege provided for in Article 29, which allows him to observe the explanations of the issuer.

From the debt collection lawsuit to the regular court hearing

The conflict began with the bank’s request to collect outstanding amounts on two high-value cards. Although enforcement was initially permitted, the client appealed, recalling that he had challenged the summaries in a timely manner.

The board made this clear when examining the case A credit card alone is not a management title. To access this type of debt collection, the bank must strictly follow the legal procedure, including a clear and documented response to claims.

What the chamber decided

Since the company could not prove that it had correctly explained the origin of the consumption, the balance certificate lost its enforceable character. Consequently, The bank can no longer claim the money in an expedited manner and only has the option of initiating regular proceedings to try to get it back.