Date Received: 2023-01-07
Issue: Improper use of your report
Subissue: Reporting company used your report improperly
Consumer Complaint: This letter shall serve as formal Notice of my Intent to file a Complaint with the Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, due to your blatant disregard of the law. In accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the following creditors, NAVY FCU - ACCT # XXXX have violated my rights. 15 USC 1681 Section 602 states that I have the right to privacy. 15 USC 1681 Section 604 ( A ) Section 2 states that a consumer reporting agency can not furnish an account without written instructions. 15 USC 1666B states that a creditor may not treat a payment on any account this is open as a consumer or revolving account as late for any purpose.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 75104
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-07
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Getting a credit card
Subissue: Card opened as result of identity theft or fraud
Consumer Complaint: XX/XX/XXXX - Fraudulent accounts opened in my name at Navy Federal Credit Union ( " NFCU '' ). Perpetrator used my real name, address, and social security number, but used a fake email address. Accounts were set up with paperless billing so I would not be aware. Credit card is mailed to an address different from mine, despite the accounts initially being set up with my real address, which shows a lack of due diligence and appears to be a violation of KYC standards. NFCU did not reveal the address the credit card was sent to until XX/XX/XXXX, see further information below. XX/XX/XXXX - I receive a letter from NFCU asking to confirm my SSN for the accounts opened in my name. I immediately call NFCU to report these accounts as fraudulent. The NFCU associate informs me that their fraud reporting system " is down '' and I have to send an email to them with the fraud report attached. I send the email as instructed. Despite refusing to confirm the validity of the use of my SSN, NFCU allows these accounts to remain open. XX/XX/XXXX - I run a XXXX report to identify any other fraudulent activity related to my SSN. I see a subprime lending company has requested a credit check. I also freeze my credit reports with all three bureaus and put fraud alerts on my reports. XX/XX/XXXX - I call the subprime lender to find out if they allowed a loan to be opened in my name. They confirm that they did not, as it was apparent to them that the request was fraudulent. Despite being a significantly smaller organization than NFCU, they were better equipped to identify fraud. XX/XX/XXXX- XXXX XXXX 's credit card fraud team calls as they have identified a fraudulent credit card application in my name. I call them back to confirm that they are correct about the fraud and to have the application terminated. I am disclosing these two incidents in addition to the NFCU fraud to highlight that two other organizations did identify these scenarios as fraudulent, while NFCU failed to do so. XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( did not document exact date ) - Received a letter from NFCU thinking it would be the results of the fraud investigation. Rather, it was a letter attempting to collect the approximately {$12000.00} of debt that the perpetrators charged to the credit card. I called NFCU to ask why the fraud investigation had not occurred. They told me because " the system was down '' at the time I submitted the report, they had not gotten around to it. The NFCU associate also told me other information including the types of charges on the card, the largest being a XXXX website. I have never purchased XXXX of any kind. The NFCU associate also informed me that the perpetrator attempted to use the card in person at a XXXX XXXX store in XXXX, XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. I do not live in XXXX and have evidence to support that I was at home on the east coast on this date. XX/XX/XXXX - The three credit bureaus had removed the fraudulent account from my credit reports, however, as NFCU still had not performed a fraud investigation and was still reporting the accounts as legitimate, the bureaus began to add the accounts back to my reports. I called NFCU again on this date and was informed that they had never processed my fraud report, still citing that it was due to the system being down. The NFCU associate I spoke to re-filed the fraud report and said she would ask to have it expediated. XX/XX/XXXX - I receive a " Notice of Important Rights '' from NFCU stating I may dispute the validity of the debt in my name. I call NFCU again and am transferred to the security team who refuse to answer any of my questions and repeatedly tell me that investigations are handled in the order they are received and despite the initial investigation being botched, they will not prioritize my case. The associate on the security team was rude and displayed a nasty attitude. XX/XX/XXXX - after accumulating the information and exhibits I need, I write and mail a letter to NFCU to dispute the debt. XX/XX/XXXX - I receive a letter from NFCU stating that the debt is still valid and that their evidence is the account statements from the previous three months. An account statement for an account that is fraudulent should not be considered evidence that the debt is valid. It appears that this is a tactic used by NFCU to avoid investigating or acknowledging fraud. NFCU also enclosed a copy of the letter sent when the credit card was mailed out. The letter was addressed to a home in XXXX, XXXX. As stated above, I do not live in XXXX. I have never lived in XXXX. I do not have relatives in XXXX. I have never authorized anyone in XXXX, or anywhere else, to use a credit card in my name. I searched for the address online and the names affiliated with the address are people I have never heard of. XX/XX/XXXX - In reviewing the hard copy account statements sent to me by NFCU, I notice a minimum payment has been made on the credit card. I did not make this payment and my assumption is that the perpetrator made this payment to be able to use the credit card again. I call NFCU to understand what has happened. The NFCU associate informs me that a payment was made from the fraudulent checking account that was also opened in my name. She agrees that it is likely the perpetrator made the payment to be able to use the card. She also notes that the fraud investigation was closed, with no notes to indicate why. NFCU 's policy is to communicate results of fraud investigations by mail. As they did not do so, the associate put in a request to have the denial of investigation mailed to me and also requested the investigation to be reopened. She then transferred me to the credit card fraud team to gain further information. The associate on the fraud team informs me that she can not give me any information. I simply wanted to understand if the perpetrator was able to use the credit card now that they had made a minimum payment. After informing her that I intended to go to the police with the information I have, she finally tells me that the card is restricted and can not be used. Still planning to go to the police and file a report, I ask for where to send the police report. She tries to avoid giving me contact information and states that information can only be sent to the fraud investigators if they ask for it. I keep pushing and eventually she gives me the email address for the security appeals team. XX/XX/XXXX - I go to my local police station to file a police report, including the address in XXXX that the credit card was sent to so the two police departments can communicate. I also call the police in XXXX, XXXX, but they refuse to take information from me and state that it needs to go through local police. Local police tell me a detective will be assigned and will reach out to me, but can not give me a timeline XX/XX/XXXX - I reach out to a financial private investigator who suggests filing with the CFPB, as the actions of the bank are a violation of KYC standards and could warrant regulatory investigation. As the instructions state not to include any personal information, I have not attached any documentation related to this complaint. Upon request, I will gladly provide any documentation including my correspondence with NFCU, the ID theft report I filed with the FTC, the ID theft affidavit provided to the police, the address the fraudulent card was sent to, etc. I have saved all documentation related to this fraud. Except for the police report, which I just requested yesterday, NFCU already has all of the same information, but refuses to do anything with it.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MA
Zip: 02127
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Struggling to pay your loan
Subissue: Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle
Consumer Complaint: Violation of law U.S. Code ( 1605 15 U.S. Code $ XXXX false and deceptive forms 15 U.S. Code 1635- right to rescission 15 U.S.Code {$1600.00} ( a ) - fraudulent authorized use of credit card ( XXXX fine ) 15 U.S.Code 1605 - finance charge defined and what is all included 15 U.S.Code 1635 ( f ) - right to rescind after 3 vears if rescind paperwork was never furnished 15 U.S.Code 1635 ( b ) - right to rescind and keep the property 15 U.S.Code 1640 ( a ) - each violation is 2x finance charge 15 U.S. Code 1662 ( b ) -mixing cash with consumer credit transaction
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 90036
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Charged fees or interest you didn't expect
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On or about ( XXXX ) XXXX, XXXX XXXX I took out a personal from the Navy Federal Credit Union while I was XXXX XXXX for the amount of {$2500.00} with payments of {$160.00} over 18 months maybe 24. I made my first payment on the loan XXXX XXXX, XXXX. At the request of my spouse I borrowed an additional {$2500.00} XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( I'm not certain exactly ). I just made a payment of {$270.00} this XX/XX/XXXX as my balance was showing {$530.00} with {$590.00} due. I sat down and did due diligence arithmetic on my payments. I have paid out in excess of {$11000.00} having only borrowed a principle amount of {$5000.00}. Now we all have heard of the term 'loan sharking ' and considering how much I have paid NFCU, I do not believe this term to be unreasonable in describing my experience.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 75234
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Getting a loan or lease
Subissue: Confusing or misleading advertising or marketing
Consumer Complaint: Navy Federal Credit Union advertised a New Car Loan rate of 4.74 % for 60 months on their website. Despite having an income and credit rating that is amongst the best in the nation they provided a loan approval with an interest rate of 5.04 % for the same term length that was advertised as 4.74 %. Follow-up phone calls did nothing to fix the situation and they could not provide any reason for not assigning the best loan rate as advertised. This feels like a bait and switch and caused a ding to my credit rating for the application. This practice should not be permitted and should be addressed.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MD
Zip: 20902
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Trouble using your card
Subissue: Can't use card to make purchases
Consumer Complaint: When my NFCU master credit card renewed, I updated on XXXX. It's been nothing but he'll. In the beginning the card wouldn't work anywhere. No it's just XXXX. XXXX sees all the deleting and reentering card in. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX says going through correctly. Call NFCU and they demand worse than mules stuck in mudd that the transaction is coming through with wrong expiration date. It took until this week to get supervisor who finally called me today. I'd asked before for someone above any escalation desk and refused. I talked to supervisor today and after pushing, demanding she begrudgingly agreed to get an analyst involved. She refused anyone above her, which is malarkey. She doesn't know what she doesn't know and truly didn't understand the glitch I was suggesting. She just kept repeating her screen. The bank should be far more proactive and not keep giving me the run around. XXXX has notes in system stating credit services sees transaction going through properly. Perhaps the bank could get tech support involved. An analyst won't help. I noted this. Basically the bank refuses to budge or truly help. The amount of calls and wasted hours is astonishing and I want compensation for my time as my time is valuable too, not to mention the embarrassment at 2 grocery stores when card didn't work to no fault of my own.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 325XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Dear Sir/Madam ; This memorandum documents our experience while securing a refinance/buy-back loan from Navy Federal Credit Union ( NFCU ) during XXXX XXXX. We found the conduct of NFCU and its employees during this experience uniformly unsatisfactory. Because of the likelihood that this recounting alone will fail to stimulate internal consideration of personnel evaluation and business practices at NFCU, it has also been provided to various regulatory, personnel certification and business ratings organizations as seem appropriate. Background In XX/XX/XXXX, we identified a townhome under construction in XXXX XXXX, XXXX, that we wished to purchase. Wishing to avoid a XXXX mortgage, our financing strategy was to take out a loan against our current home in XXXX, and use the money to purchase the XXXX property for cash. We determined to apply for the loan and lock-in a rate immediately, as news reports indicated mortgage rates would rise significantly throughout XXXX and early XXXX. The completion date for the property is XX/XX/XXXX. So, we also planned to delay closing the refinance/loan until as late as possible to allow time to refine the precise loan amount, and reduce the number of payments required prior to closing on the property. Chronology of Events The following chronology is provided as an objective outline of the sequence of events that led to our current situation. Early XX/XX/XXXX. We applied for what the NFCU XXXX XXXX termed a refinance-buy back loan. We explained the background described above to the XXXX XXXX, including our desire to refine the loan value prior to closing, delay closing the loan for as long as possible within the rate lock period, and occasionally pay down principal with the objective of reducing monthly payments. XXXX. We received pre-approval of the loan package for a maximum value of {$400000.00}, locking in a XXXX XXXX rate on a XXXX, fully-collateralized loan. The expiration for the rate lock-in was XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX. We notified the XXXX XXXX, by phonecon and email, that the final loan amount desired for the loan was {$270000.00}. We have copies of the emails and, presumably, NFCU has recordings of the phonecon relaying this information. XXXX XXXX. Loan documents were delivered for signature. The loan value identified in the documents was {$400000.00}, rather than the {$270000.00} we requested. We signed the documents, assuming we could either cancel the contract, or that NFCU would undertake whatever administrative procedures were necessary to correct its error. We contacted the XXXX XXXX immediately, who responded that NFCU would not correct its error and that if we exercised the three-day cancellation option, NFCU would not rewrite the contract within the rate lock period. XXXX XXXX. The XXXX XXXX rate lock-in period expired. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. We contacted the XXXX XXXX to express our dissatisfaction with being held accountable for NFCUs clerical error. She provided us another point of contact at NFCU Member Services. XXXX XXXX. We called NFCU Member Services. The advisor informed us that the monthly payments for the loan could not be recast, ever, and that payments would be required for the full value of the erroneous {$400000.00} loan amount. XXXX XXXX. Calls to and from NFCU yielded various limited options for correcting NFCUs mistake. NFCUs Response The conduct of virtually all NFCU personnel involved has been uniformly unhelpful, frequently condescending to the point of insulting, and breathtakingly uninformed throughout this process. While starting off as little more than annoyances, the general sloppiness, laziness, technical incompetence and lack of attention to detail, culminated in a major clerical error on the part of NFCU that may, as of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, result in significant financial consequences for us, with no apparent adverse consequences or accountability, either corporate or individual, for NFCU. In some scenarios NFCU might actually benefit, at the customers expense, from its own mistake. Because she was the principal customer interface, and is personally responsible for the major clerical error, XXXX XXXX XXXX, the NFCU XXXX XXXX bears at least initial responsibility for the problem. Starting out with the annoyances, that in some cases exacerbated her mistake, XXXX XXXX provided several different names, phone numbers and email addresses for contact. Her supervisors contact information, listed on the signed loan documents, is incorrect. That NFCU is unable to provide something as simple as clear, unambiguous, correct, contact information unfortunately accurately reflects the overall competence demonstrated during this experience. XXXX XXXX seemed to have difficulty comprehending our desire to delay closing as long as possible, and perhaps erroneously assumed that mistakes on the closing documents were of little consequence since she expected there would be time to fix them. Contributing to the lack of timely response to this clerical mistake, beyond NFCUs general lack of a sense of urgency or customer service, was XXXX XXXX insistence on assigning a title agent from XXXXXXXX XXXX, rather than the local XXXX title agent that we specified. No explanation for this arbitrary assignment of a non-local title agent was provided. Most significantly, despite being notified on XXXX XXXX both in writing and on the phone of the required new loan amount, and despite a lengthy previous phonecon on the same subject, XXXX XXXX failed to ensure that the correct loan amount was entered in the loan documents provided for signature. This was a significant clerical error. XXXX XXXX apparently lacked the authority to correct her mistake. Her supervisor was completely absent during all phases of this process and is, presumably, XXXX of the problem ( s ). Supervisor, and supervision seem completely absent at all levels at NFCU. This explicit commission of errors, and more general demonstration of incompetence, lassitude and indifference, were in no way confined to XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX attempted to pass the consequences of her failure to properly process our loan on to XXXX XXXX XXXX in Member Services. When contacted, XXXX XXXX, having obviously made no effort to inform herself on the issue in the intervening XXXX days, proceeded to deliver a condescending and utterly uninformed lecture on the nature of our loan and the limited options we had to mitigate the consequences of NFCUs gross incompetence. Subsequent discussions with NFCU supervisors, such as they are, suggest XXXX XXXX was grossly misinformed as to our loan, and basic NFCU procedures. Throughout this process, NFCU and its employees consistently failed to acknowledge any responsibility ( or accountability ) for this mistake or take any initiative to address the consequences to the customer. Instead, we were contacted by a series of employees who were so comprehensively ignorant of the situation, and NFCUs own procedures, that we received completely different answers from each, and often different answers from the same employees at different times. On occasion the strategies offered were so utterly implausible we were left wondering if they were not simply efforts to stall until our options had all expired. This made planning and damage control, on our part, virtually impossible. NFCUs position has changed, at the time of writing, within bounds roughly defined by the following positions. Presumably, the initial plan was to process the loan properly. We borrow {$270000.00} at XXXX XXXX, and begin making payments in XXXX. This became untenable on XXXX XXXX when NFCU provided incorrect documents for signature and refused to correct the mistake. Process the loan for an amount we did not request, we pay down the principal by the overage before the first payment, and recompute the loan payments for the new principal ( recast ), putting us more or less back on the same track, except we only have two opportunities to pay down principal, one of which is exhausted correcting NFCUs mistake. Process the loan for the wrong amount, deny us the opportunity to pay down principal at all, and require monthly payments on a {$400000.00} loan that we did not request. We determined extricating ourselves from this mess of NFCUs creation would result in a loss to us of around {$40000.00}. This was XXXX XXXX position, and would have required recourse to legal action. Process the loan for the wrong amount, allow us to pay down principal at an unspecified future date of NFCUs choosing. This option still required us to pay the full {$400000.00} loan monthly payment for somewhere between XXXX to XXXX months while NFCU processed the loan. This seemed so fantastically incomprehensible that we assumed it was probably illegal, so much so we never really believed it was an option. Simply threatening legal action would have presumably collapsed this scenario, had it lasted long enough to do so. At some point, NFCU clarified, or altered, its position on recasting the loan, and declared that this process was allowed twice a year, not twice over XXXX years. The actual loan documents indicate that the recomputation of loan payment will be done at the lenders discretion with no additional qualifications. So, apparently, recasting can be done never, twice, XXXX times, as many times as the lender allows, or as many times as the borrower desires. This single issue serves as a convenient metaphor for the astonishingly amateurish manner in which this entire incident has been handled by NFCU. On XXXX XXXX, NFCU offered to grant an indulgence to pay down the principal with the overage, and recast the loan, before the first payment. The XXXX XXXX offer was followed by yet another slightly different offer on XXXX XXXX that, apparently, involves actually resubmitting the notarized loan paperwork for a {$230000.00} loan, purportedly also still at the original XXXX XXXX locked rate. Why this fix is now possible with nothing more than yet more inconvenience for the customer was not explained. Unfortunately, none of these scenarios have been provided in writing. Experience suggests that verbal agreements with, or explanations by, NFCU and its employees are likely to be at best obfuscatory, and frequently blatant falsehoods. We might be excused for being skeptical that the most recent offer of what seems to be essentially a new loan- actually close to the original loan we asked for at the original rate ( well after the rate lock has expired ) might simply be yet another NFCU stratagem for covering up its own mistake and passing on the consequences to the customer. Summary No formal summary should be necessary. Even if resolved in a manner that does not result in adverse financial consequences for the customer it has been - that hardly constitutes what could be deemed a successful business transaction. The burden and stress of mitigating the consequences of NFCUs mistakes and pervasive incompetence has fallen entirely on the customer. NFCU would do well to start at the basics by reflecting on the meaning of the word customer. Customers pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in finance fees for a service consisting of little more, beyond the risk of the loan itself, - XXXX in our case since our collateral is valued at substantially more than the loan than bookkeeping, secretarial work, and the occasional provision of coherent explanations and reassurance. Our experience with NFCU illustrates lack of competence at any of these tasks, aggravated by one or more layers of supervisors who neither supervise nor are technically competent at solving problems when they do arise. All this is complemented by a seeming default position of ignorance, rudeness, blamecasting and condescension when dealing with those same customers. The right answer here, that apparently continues to elude NFCU management, was on the afternoon of XXXX XXXX, we are contacted by someone in a position of sufficient authority to apologize for NFCUs mistake, and with a guarantee ( with a credible timetable ) that NFCU will make it right without further burden to the customer. How NFCU might subsequently handle its glaring training, competence and supervisory shortcomings is a different matter. Respectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: WY
Zip: 82070
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Subissue: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Consumer Complaint: I am disputing the amount on my statement you send me every month. How can I pay a positive amount? The credit balance is in a positive amount. I am fully aware that you send me a statement every month and this statement is my dividend check from NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION for the interest I have earned, as a result of NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION trading my securities on the exchange. This has been done without my knowledge and constitutes that NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION trustee listed above is committing SECURITIES FRAUD against me which is an automatic federal offense under H.R. 5037 2018, Pub. L. 116 Stat. 804 [ Codified as 18 U.S. Code 1348. ] Without prejudice or recourse Done in Good Faith
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: SC
Zip: 29073
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Subissue: Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Consumer Complaint: I am disputing the amount on my statement you send me every month. How can I pay a positive amount? The credit balance is in a positive amount. I am fully aware that you send me a statement every month and this statement is my dividend check from NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION for the interest I have earned, as a result of NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION trading my securities on the exchange. This has been done without my knowledge and constitutes that NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION trustee listed above is committing SECURITIES FRAUD against me which is an automatic federal offense under H.R. 5037 2018, Pub. L. 116 Stat. 804 [ Codified as 18 U.S. Code 1348. ] Without prejudice or recourse Done in Good Faith
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: SC
Zip: 29073
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-06
Issue: Improper use of your report
Subissue: Reporting company used your report improperly
Consumer Complaint: In accordance with the fair credit Reporting act XXXX Account # XXXX, has violated my rights. 15 USC 1681 Section 602 States I have the right to privacy. 15 USC 1681 Section 604 A Section 2 : It also states a consumer reporting agency can not furnish a account without my written instructions. 15 USC 1666B : A creditor may not treat payment on a credit card account ur open end consumer credit plan as late for any purpose.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: AL
Zip: 352XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A