Citigroup is currently defending against a cluster of active lawsuits and regulatory matters: two sexual harassment suits from senior women in its wealth and equities divisions, a fraud case brought by the New York Attorney General now before the Second Circuit, fallout from a discrimination consent order involving Armenian American credit card applicants, a recently approved $29.5 million robocall class settlement, and continuing federal consent orders governing risk management. The list of Citigroup lawsuits below covers the matters that are live in court, on appeal, or still shaping what customers and employees can recover.
Julia Carreon Sexual Harassment Suit
Julia Carreon, Citigroup’s former Global Head of Platform and Experiences for its wealth unit, sued the bank on January 26, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. She alleged sexual harassment and a hostile work environment centered on Andy Sieg, the head of Citi’s wealth division.1AdvisorHub. Citi Denies Former Wealth Exec’s Sexual Harassment Claims
Carreon alleged that Sieg engaged in “public and sexually charged conduct,” sent suggestive text messages, and implied to colleagues that the two were intimate.2Wealthmanagement.com. Citi Denies Sexual Harassment Claims Against Wealth Head Andy Sieg She claimed the bank’s culture reduced her to being “perceived as a sex object,” with colleagues assuming her December 2023 promotion resulted from an affair with Sieg. She also alleged that Citi’s HR department was “weaponized” against her, opening an investigation into her “special access” to Sieg after she asked him to stop discussing her at town halls. She left the bank in June 2024.3InvestmentNews. Citigroup Hit With Lawsuit Alleging Weaponized HR, Hostile Culture at Wealth Unit
One day after Carreon filed, Citigroup opened a second front in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, petitioning to compel arbitration under employment agreements she signed in 2021 and 2022.4Arizent. Citigroup Petition to Compel Arbitration The bank called Carreon’s harassment claims “fabricated” and “legally infirm,” arguing she had constructed the sexual harassment theory to trigger the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, a 2022 federal law that lets plaintiffs bypass pre-dispute arbitration agreements for such claims. Citigroup pointed to emails in which Carreon praised Sieg’s leadership and integrity, and said the HR investigation was actually prompted by reports she had used Sieg’s name to threaten other employees.
The case is on hold. On May 11, 2026, Judge Loretta A. Preska stayed the New York action pending resolution of the Texas arbitration dispute, with a status update due August 11, 2026.5CourtListener. Carreon v. Citigoup Inc. In Texas, the parties jointly moved to stay the Rule 26(f) conference on May 22, 2026.6PACER Monitor. Citigroup Inc. et al v. Carreon, Joint Motion to Stay Carreon’s attorney, Linda Friedman of Stowell & Friedman, has challenged the bank’s strategy of seeking a Texas ruling on a New York dispute.
Ardith Lindsey Harassment Suit
Ardith Lindsey, a managing director and 15-year veteran of Citi’s equities division, sued the bank in November 2023, alleging it tolerated a culture of sexual harassment and abuse by male executives.7The New York Times. Citi Sex Harassment Lawsuit Lindsey alleged years of abuse by her former supervisor, Mani Singh, including dozens of threatening texts after their relationship ended, one saying he was “going to set you on fire.”
Lindsey said that after she reported Singh’s death threats in November 2022, Citi’s internal security and investigative services unit functioned as an “internal hit squad” that twisted her confidential statements against her and rejected her requests for legal counsel during internal interviews.8New York Post. Ardith Lindsey Suing Citigroup Slams Firm’s Investigations Unit as Internal Hit Squad Citigroup acknowledged Singh resigned in November 2022 before its investigation was completed but said Lindsey had previously described the relationship as consensual, and pledged to defend against her claims. Like Carreon’s, Lindsey’s case proceeds in open court under the 2022 federal arbitration carve-out.
New York Attorney General Fraud Lawsuit
New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Citibank on January 30, 2024, alleging the bank failed to protect customers from online scams and illegally denied reimbursement to fraud victims.9NY Attorney General. Attorney General James Sues Citibank for Failing To Protect and Reimburse Victims The complaint alleged inadequate anti-fraud protocols, missed red flags such as logins from unrecognized devices and rapid transfers, and misleading treatment of victims who were told their money would be returned, then required to sign affidavits the bank later used to deny claims.
The central legal question is whether the Electronic Fund Transfer Act applies to consumer-initiated wire transfers. On January 21, 2025, Judge Paul Oetken largely denied Citibank’s motion to dismiss, ruling that the EFTA’s wire transfer exemption covers only the interbank movement of funds, not the initial consumer payment order that debits a customer’s account. The court called this a “question of first impression.”10FindLaw. People of the State of New York v. Citibank, N.A. Some claims were dismissed, including allegations the bank failed to disclose security protocols and failed to detect identity-theft red flags.11Courthouse News Service. Citibank Loses Bid To Dismiss New York Fraud Lawsuit
The Second Circuit heard oral arguments on April 6, 2026, on whether the EFTA exemption covers consumer-initiated electronic wire transfers end to end. Reporting from the hearing described the panel as receptive to Citibank’s broader-exemption arguments.12Law360. Citi Tells 2nd Circ. EFTA Exempts Wire Transfers End-to-End No decision has been issued. James is seeking restitution for victims denied reimbursement over a six-year period, civil penalties, disgorgement, and court-ordered security improvements.
Armenian Discrimination Case and CFPB Order Termination
In November 2023, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a consent order finding Citibank had discriminated against credit card applicants of Armenian descent in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The CFPB found employees targeted California applicants with surnames ending in “-ian” and “-yan,” using internal slurs like “Armenian bad guys” and “Southern California Armenian Mafia.”13U.S. Senate – Sen. Schiff. Sen. Schiff, Colleagues Probe CFPB Termination of Citibank’s Settlement The order required Citibank to pay $1.4 million in redress and a $24.5 million civil money penalty.14Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Citibank, N.A. Enforcement Action
On October 16, 2025, the CFPB under Acting Director Russell Vought terminated the consent order three years before its planned 2028 expiration, stating Citibank had fulfilled “certain obligations.” In April 2026, a group of federal lawmakers led by Senator Adam Schiff opened a formal inquiry demanding justification and questioning whether the bank had actually completed compliance.
A separate private class action was filed by LTL Attorneys in December 2023 on behalf of Armenian American customers. That suit alleges that since 2015 Citibank flagged applicants with Armenian-sounding surnames for a special review unit where applications were routinely rejected under fabricated pretenses, with managers instructing employees not to document the practice in writing or on recorded phone lines.15LTL Attorneys. LTL Files Class Action Against Citibank Over Discriminatory Redlining Policy
TCPA Robocall Class Settlement
In Head v. Citibank, N.A., the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona granted final approval on January 14, 2025, to a $29.5 million settlement resolving Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims. The suit alleged Citibank placed prerecorded robocalls to cellphone numbers not belonging to current or former customers or authorized users, in connection with past-due credit card accounts.16GDR Law Firm. Citibank TCPA
The class covered calls placed between August 15, 2014, and July 31, 2024. Participating class members who submitted timely claims received approximately $1,500 each from the non-reversionary fund, with individual payouts capped at $2,500.17ClassAction.org. Head et al v. Citigroup Incorporated et al Settlement Agreement The claims window has closed.
Federal Consent Orders and Regulatory Penalties
Citigroup and its parent company remain subject to consent orders issued in October 2020 by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve Board. Those orders require sweeping improvements to enterprise-wide risk management, compliance, data governance, and internal controls, and came with a $400 million OCC fine.18OCC. OCC Takes Enforcement Actions Against Citibank
In July 2024, regulators found insufficient progress. The OCC assessed an additional $75 million penalty and the Federal Reserve imposed a separate penalty of about $61 million, for a combined $135.6 million in new fines tied to data quality and risk management deficiencies.19Banking Dive. OCC Withdraws Amendment to Citi 2020 Consent Order The OCC also issued an amendment requiring a resource review plan.
On December 18, 2025, the OCC withdrew that 2024 amendment, and the Federal Reserve closed three notices requiring improvements to trading risk management controls.20Citigroup. Citi Statement on OCC Removal of Amendment to Consent Order The bank said “most of our programs are at or nearly at target-state.” The underlying 2020 consent orders remain in effect.