⟡ “We Closed Your Account. You’re Welcome.” ⟡
A Mistaken $500 Credit Triggers Apple Card Cancellation, While a $114 Dispute is Rejected Without Review
Filed: 2 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/APPLE/EMAIL-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-02_SWANK_Email_AppleCard_DisputeEscalation_AccountError.pdf
Summary: A formal escalation to Apple Card demanding correction of a wrongly closed account and mishandled dispute, asserting written-only communication and procedural review.
I. What Happened
On 2 June 2025, a formal letter was sent to Apple Card support after the user’s account was abruptly closed, allegedly due to a $500 credit error — a fault not attributed to the user. Simultaneously, a $114.20 dispute was rejected without a supervisory review.
The escalation requests:
– Reopening of the dispute
– Investigation into the erroneous credit and cancellation
– Written-only response due to medical communication needs
This letter affirms the user's identity as Polly Chromatic, with legal name aliases provided, and cites a SWANK policy URL enforcing written-only contact.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
• Major financial services can terminate credit access based on automated or misattributed data
• Disputes may be rejected without proper review or consumer protection standards
• Procedural safeguards for medically disabled individuals are not built into standard systems
• Institutional opacity mirrors public-sector gatekeeping: no triage, no apology, just closure
• Cross-institutional harms (medical, financial, administrative) interlock, even in private-sector settings
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because this is how financial power enacts harm through infrastructure, not intent.
Because Apple Card’s systems rejected both a valid dispute and a disabled person’s right to accessible process.
Because the tech sector now operates with the same bureaucratic mystique as the state — and SWANK documents all forms of algorithmic disenfranchisement.
This was more than a charge. It was an erasure.
IV. SWANK’s Position
We do not accept that $500 errors should result in credit deletion without restitution.
We do not accept that dispute processes can bypass the disabled with no alternative route.
We do not accept that systems designed by Apple should break at the first sign of friction — and blame the user.
This wasn’t account closure. This was financial profiling in silence.
And SWANK will document every refusal they automate.
⟡ This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡
Every entry is timestamped.
Every sentence is jurisdictional.
Every structure is protected.
To mimic this format without licence is not homage. It is breach.
We do not permit imitation. We preserve it as evidence.
This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with velvet contempt, preserved for future litigation.
Because evidence deserves elegance.
And retaliation deserves an archive.
© 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved.
Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited — as panic, not authorship.