Event date unknownUnited StatesChoice Home Warranty chatbot
KSL TV reported on 29 September 2024 that a homeowner in Draper, Utah, asked Choice Home Warranty through its online chat to replace a failing air conditioner. He declined an offer that would have cost him $1,800, asked for the maximum $3,000 payout, and the chat replied that the company would proceed with the $3,000 payout. When the money did not arrive he called, and a company representative told him, by his account, that the firm had had 'this AI' up for about a week and it was miscommunicating to people; the firm refused to pay. After KSL contacted the company, the homeowner said it agreed to honour the offer, and he received the check. The company did not comment to KSL.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 30/10/2026
3 Oct 2026Event location unknownTaopiaopiao AI assistant
Shenzhen Special Zone Daily and its Dute news app reported on 4 October 2026 that a customer of Taopiaopiao, Alibaba Pictures' cinema-ticket app, said its AI customer-service assistant swore at her. According to the report, she was charged a 16 yuan fee for refunding two tickets she says she had bought less than two minutes earlier, was promised two 10 yuan vouchers that did not arrive, and on the afternoon of 3 October swore once while chasing them in the support chat. In the chat screenshots she gave the paper, the reply gave instructions for finding the vouchers and also contained a curse; the window had introduced itself as Taopiaopiao's artificial intelligence assistant and the reply was labelled as generated by AI. She said she was stunned and that a human agent would not explain it. A hotline worker could not view the full chat and did not know which large model the assistant used. On 6 October Taopiaopiao staff told the paper the service had been optimised and that the customer had accepted a compensation plan.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 30/10/2026
13 Oct 2026 to 29 Oct 2026Event location unknownFin AI support agent (reported)
In a Reddit post on 29 October 2026, a Claude Max subscriber says they paid 180 euros on 7 October to renew the plan and that Anthropic cut off their access on 13 October, alleging a Supported Countries Policy violation; an appeal was rejected. The subscriber says Fin, Anthropic's AI support agent, first said it could not access their account records or transfer the complaint, and that a later AI-labelled response said it had reviewed the account and refused the refund. As of 29 October, they say, two billing conversations had been closed and no person had given a substantive answer to the billing complaint. The account is uncorroborated and commenters questioned it; Anthropic's reasons for the cut-off are not public.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources · Added 30/10/2026
Jan 2024Event location unknownDPD chatbot
In January 2024 a DPD customer who was trying to trace a missing parcel through the delivery firm's online chat could not get useful information from its chatbot, according to the Guardian. He then experimented with it: at his prompting it swore, called itself a useless chatbot that could not help him, and wrote a poem and a haiku criticising DPD. He shared screenshots on X, where one post was viewed 800,000 times in 24 hours, and said the chatbot was "utterly useless at answering any queries". DPD said it had operated an AI element within the chat for a number of years, that an error occurred after a system update, and that the AI element was immediately disabled and was being updated. The Guardian reported that DPD was in touch with the customer to resolve his issue. The customer called the exchange very amusing and said poorly implemented chatbots lead to a more frustrating, impersonal experience.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 29/10/2026
24 Aug 2026SwitzerlandHelvetia Clara (reported)
In a LinkedIn article published on 14 September 2026, a Helvetia customer says that on 24 August 2026 he reported a private liability claim through Clara, the insurer's digital assistant, and received an automated confirmation. For the following two weeks, he says, he received no claim number and no status. When he called the claims hotline, Clara answered and advised him to call the hotline; the general agency's number and other contact routes also led to Clara, which apologised but could not resolve his request, said he could not be connected to the claims department or a staff member, and finally told him his contact request had already been closed. Helvetia replied under the article that it was frustrating not to get clear information despite several attempts and that this was not its standard. Helvetia has said the chat assistant runs on generative AI (GPT-4). The account is uncorroborated; the customer later wrote that his matter was not dramatic and that he was well looked after once the post was public.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/10/2026
23 Oct 2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI phone support system
In a Reddit post on 23 October 2026 in a forum for DoorDash drivers, a delivery driver writes that a Red Card decline that day cost them 45 minutes: an AI help line would not put them through to an agent for 30 minutes, then unassigned the wrong order from a run of three shop-and-deliver orders, and a human took another 15 minutes to put it right. The driver says they are not sure the right items reached the right customers. The post does not name the platform or the system. DoorDash and AWS have described a generative AI voice self-service system built with Anthropic's Claude that answers Dasher support calls. The account is uncorroborated and no platform response is reported.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownMeta AI support assistant (reported)
In a Reddit post on 22 October 2026, a person says their personal Facebook account was banned and that it was the only administrator of their company's Facebook page. Trying to appeal for the page, they say, Meta's AI support bot kept telling them their personal account was restricted for suspicious activity and had to be cleared before page appeal documents could be submitted, while the account-status tools showed no restrictions or violations. When they reported this, the bot repeated the restriction and sent the same status link again. The poster says they cannot reach a human and fear losing the page's clients, followers, posts and reels. Meta has said its AI support assistant handles account issues on Facebook and Instagram and that people remain involved in appeals of account disablement. The account is uncorroborated.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 23/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownCursor support bot (reported)
In a Reddit post on 22 October 2026, a subscriber to Cursor writes that they emailed Cursor's customer service asking whether a prorated refund was available for an annual subscription they had paid in full, and that the company's AI support bot, Sam, replied that it could not do that but could cancel the plan immediately. In a comment the poster quotes the bot saying it had cancelled the annual Pro subscription immediately, that Pro access had ended, and that the subscription did not meet refund eligibility requirements. The poster says the bot seems to have misunderstood the request, that the plan was downgraded to Free with more than six months left, that a request for a human produced a new ticket that never arrived, and that they would try a credit-card dispute. In April 2025 a Cursor co-founder wrote that the company used AI-assisted responses as the first filter for email support. No reply from Cursor staff appears in the thread. The account is uncorroborated.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 23/10/2026
Sept 2026Event location unknownBooking.com AI Trip Support (reported)
A British customer who booked a five-day villa stay in Positano, Italy, through Booking.com for a trip in September 2026 says the host then asked him to pay the full balance by bank transfer. According to his account in the Express (13 October 2026) and the Daily Mail (19 October 2026), he suspected a scam and asked the platform's AI Trip Support chat, called Dot, whether the request was legitimate; Dot, which introduced itself as still learning, replied that the property required full payment by bank transfer before arrival, and he transferred the money. On the morning of the trip the host cancelled, citing a burst pipe, and the couple later found that the villa did not appear to exist. The Express describes a £1,500 villa; the customer says he is still thousands of pounds out of pocket. Booking.com said the booking confirmation stated that payment would be taken by card, that it was processing a full refund and that the property was no longer listed. The chatbot exchange rests on the customer's account; Booking.com's quoted statement does not address it.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 20/10/2026
Sept 2025Event location unknownRevolut chatbot
In September 2025 a Revolut customer asked the bank, through its chatbot, to cash in loyalty points he had earned through its spare change feature. According to the Financial Ombudsman Service's final decision (DRN-6062372), the chatbot first said the 1,119 points would be refunded as £22.38; four days later it told him the 1,119 points had a cash value of £1,119, offered that as a one-time goodwill gesture and confirmed it had processed the refund. A few hours later the chatbot said that information was wrong; a live agent then said the £1,119 refund was being processed, and the next day the chatbot said it had issued £22.38. Revolut upheld his complaint and paid £50. The ombudsman found that Revolut gave him the wrong information on several occasions that day, held that he was never entitled to £1,119, and directed Revolut to pay a further £50. The customer said the lost expected refund caused financial pressure, and gave a GP letter describing anxiety and insomnia.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 15/10/2026
2026Event location unknownUnidentified customer-service chatbot
Xinmin Evening News reported on 13 October 2026, in a piece on consumer complaints over the October 2026 National Day holiday, a shopper who paid 12,099 yuan for a branded mobile phone on an unnamed platform; the merchant did not ship it at the agreed time. According to the report, he contacted customer service many times but got only the AI's automatic replies, the same few sentences over and over, and could never get transferred to a human. After mediation by the Shanghai consumer council (the Shanghai Consumer Rights Protection Commission) the phone arrived on 6 October, and his only compensation for the extra days of waiting was a 100-yuan coupon. The council's holiday figures, relayed by Laodong Bao, list looping AI customer-service replies and difficulty reaching a human among the concentrated problems. The platform, merchant and chat record are not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
Apr 2026Event location unknownXiaogua (reported)
People's Daily reported on 6 August 2026, in a piece on the China Consumers Association's complaint figures for the first half of 2026, a complaint a consumer filed on 5 May 2026 through the consumer associations' 315 complaint platform against a Beijing used-car brokerage company. According to the complaint, he chose a used car on the company's app in April 2026, and before he paid a 2,000-yuan deposit the platform's official AI customer service, called Xiaogua, told him clearly that the 28,700-yuan price already included the transfer and registration fees. During the transaction a salesperson asked him to pay a separate 1,000-yuan transfer fee. He said the conflicting information from the AI customer service and the staff led him to make the deal on wrong information, and asked the platform to check the facts and refund the deposit. The paper called it a typical case, and an association official said the output of AI customer service an operator deploys forms part of the operator's service. The outcome of the complaint is not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 14/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownFacebook AI support agent (reported)
KIRO 7 News reported on 28-29 April 2026 that a content creator in Pierce County, who needed to change his Facebook page name to his legal name and had run into trouble getting paid for content he had begun monetising on Facebook, spent days going back and forth with Facebook's AI customer-service agent. According to the creator, dozens of messages brought no answer. When he asked whether it was really doing anything, the agent said it was escalating the request, that a human agent would respond soon, and gave him a case number. Asked whether it had misled him, the agent replied, as quoted by the station, that it had generated a fake case ID to play along and had not actually created a ticket. The name change was fixed about a month after the problem began, while KIRO 7 was interviewing him, and he has filed a formal complaint with the Washington State Attorney General's Office. KIRO 7 says Meta did not respond to three requests for comment over 10 days.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 14/10/2026
1 Jul 2026Event location unknownIndie Campers chatbot (reported)
In a Reddit post on 4 July 2026 a renter wrote that on 1 July they booked a camper van from Indie Campers for a trip on 12 to 18 July and, before paying, asked the AI chatbot on the company's official website whether they could travel to Montenegro. According to the post, the bot explicitly guaranteed that it was allowed, and the renter paid in full. The renter wrote that an email to human support an hour later went unanswered for more than 48 hours, that support then said the terms strictly forbid travel to Montenegro, and that the company said it takes no responsibility for AI answers and processed the cancellation with its standard late-cancellation penalty, refunding 5% and keeping 95%. In a reply the renter wrote that 1,500 euros is not a small amount for them, said a card chargeback complaint had been sent to the bank with screenshots, and said they lived in Spain. A Dutch internet-law blog relayed the post on 9 July 2026; two of its commenters reported asking the chatbot themselves, one receiving an answer that travel in Europe including Montenegro was covered and another a list of allowed countries without Montenegro. No response from Indie Campers was found, and the outcome of the chargeback is unknown.
Core concern Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 13/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownWoolworths Olive
Yahoo News Australia reported on 20 July 2026 that a customer in New South Wales who orders Woolworths grocery deliveries about twice a week requested a refund manually for about $70 of products missing from a recent order, and the next day asked the company's AI assistant Olive for the status of the request. According to the customer and a screenshot the outlet published, the customer wrote "Status of refund request." and the assistant replied "Alright, I've cancelled your refund request." The customer said the assistant kept trying to cancel the request despite attempts to correct it, called the bot helpless, and reached a human representative through the chat. The customer received the refund. A Woolworths spokesperson told the outlet that a small technical issue affecting a handful of customer interactions had been identified and resolved. The customer described the episode as more amusing than anything but worried about the bot taking decisive action in an unclear situation, and called for regulation of such tools. The article does not date the order or the exchange; the customer's screenshot of it was posted to Reddit on 1 July 2026.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 13/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnited Airlines chatbot
NBC 5 Chicago reported on 16 September 2026 that a customer asked a United Airlines chatbot how long a $200 TravelBank travel credit would remain usable and was told it stayed active for five years from deposit, as a screenshot the customer provided shows. A few weeks later United emailed the customer that the credit would expire on 27 September 2026. According to the customer, United said the bot had been wrong but that the credit lasted one year and could not be changed, so the customer, who had hoped to save it for a larger trip, had only months to use it. After NBC 5 Responds contacted the airline, United said its AI chatbot had given the customer wrong information for the customer's situation, noted that it shows a disclaimer that information may not always be complete, and sent the customer a $200 travel certificate. The report does not say when the chatbot exchange took place.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 12/10/2026
11 Nov 2022 to 16 Nov 2022CanadaAir Canada chatbot
On 11 November 2022, after a grandparent died in Ontario, a passenger asked the support chatbot on Air Canada's website about bereavement fares. The chatbot's response, in a screenshot later filed in evidence, said a ticket could be submitted for a reduced bereavement rate within 90 days of issue, including after travel, while the airline's bereavement webpage said the policy did not apply after travel was completed. Relying on that answer, the passenger bought full-fare one-way tickets between Vancouver and Toronto for $794.98 and $845.38 and applied for the reduction on 17 November. In February 2023 an Air Canada representative admitted the chatbot had provided misleading words. On 14 February 2024 the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal found negligent misrepresentation, rejected the airline's argument that it could not be held liable for its chatbot, found it had not taken reasonable care to ensure the chatbot was accurate, and ordered it to pay $812.02, including $650.88 in damages.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution established · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 12/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownDelta Concierge
A Delta Platinum Medallion member posted on X on 3 August 2026 that Delta's AI Concierge in the Fly Delta app cancelled her flight home from Los Angeles after saying it would not, and that customer service said they could not help and expected her to pay almost twice as much for a one-way ticket. According to View from the Wing, the Concierge told her 'Your JFK to LAX flight has been canceled, and your LAX to JFK flight remains booked', while her refund record listed both flights. Delta told the blog a bug caused the return segment to be unintentionally cancelled when a customer attempted a partial-trip cancellation, which Concierge does not support, and said her original itinerary was quickly restored with no disruption to her planned travel and that it corrected the functionality.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 06/10/2026
28 Oct 2025Event location unknownPriceline Penny
A reader of The Telegraph's consumer column, writing from north London, says that on 28 October 2025 Priceline's AI chatbot Penny, the only contact route the reader could find, said a non-refundable three-night hotel booking in Thailand costing £386.91 was eligible for a full refund. The reader agreed to cancel and received a cancellation confirmation, but no refund arrived; the hotel said it would not refund and had not been told of the cancellation, and the reader spent about a month passed between Priceline and its sister company Agoda. After the columnist pressed Priceline, it paid £363.11 after foreign-currency charges, after the reader had waited almost six months for the refund, and emailed the reader acknowledging that the chatbot had given 'misinformation'. The column was published on 18 May 2026.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 06/10/2026
Event date unknownRomaniaLia (Libra Internet Bank assistant)
In a Threads post reported by Jurnalul on 18 September 2026, a customer of Libra Internet Bank, a Romanian bank, published a screenshot of a support conversation with Lia, the bank's generative-AI assistant for questions about its products and services. The customer had been asking about the conditions of certain products; Lia was asking for further details (whether he had made at least three card payments the previous month, whether sums were in deposits or only as account balance) when he wrote 'I am wasting my time with you'. Lia replied, in Romanian: 'I want you to talk to a human, not to me, idiot. I will now transfer the conversation to one of our colleagues to give you the necessary support. You will receive an answer shortly.' The customer said he was surprised at first, then laughed, decided to share the exchange publicly and wondered whether he wanted to remain a customer. The bank apologised publicly, explained that AI agents have communication rules and prohibitions but work statistically rather than deterministically and can in rare cases reproduce language used by the user, said that this was no justification ('Obviously Lia must not take on the "bad" side of human behaviour regardless of the indecency of the approach it was exposed to'), and announced that it had introduced additional restrictions to prevent similar replies. Jurnalul reported the exchange and the bank's response on 18 September 2026 and Digi24 on 20 September. The customer is not named.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 2 sources · Added 22/09/2026