Consumer complaint received 2026-03-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Sued you in a state where you do not live or did not sign for the debt
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I respectfully submit this response to Navy Federal Credit Unions reply regarding the disputed credit card account. After reviewing their statement, I must firmly reiterate that the account referenced in their response does not belong to me. I did not open, authorize, or use this account. This account is the result of identity theft, and I have taken formal legal steps to document and report the fraud. Navy Federals response does not resolve the issue. Instead, it repeats internal records without addressing the core issue of unauthorized account opening. The existence of internal documentation does not establish that I personally authorized or benefited from this account. Identity Theft Was Properly Reported I filed an Identity Theft Report with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ). Filing an FTC report is not a casual action ; it is a formal declaration made under penalty of law. The report documents that I was the victim of identity theft and that this Navy Federal account was opened without my authorization. The fact that Navy Federal states their investigation found the claim unsupported does not negate the existence of identity theft. Internal review conclusions are not proof of consumer authorization. They are simply a repetition of data contained within the institutions own records. Identity theft frequently involves the misuse of accurate personal identifying information. The presence of correct identifying details such as : Social Security number Date of birth Address Name does not establish that I personally opened the account. It only demonstrates that a perpetrator had access to my personal information. Lack of Evidence of Authorization Navy Federals response states that the account was established on XX/XX/XXXX, and charged off in XX/XX/XXXX. However, the response fails to provide proof that I : Signed an application Completed identity verification in person Authorized any transactions Received or used the credit card Benefited from the account Merely stating that an account was opened and later charged off does not prove that I opened it. If Navy Federal intends to maintain that this account is mine, then they must provide actual evidence of authorization, such as : A signed original application IP address logs tied directly to my personal device Video surveillance if opened in person Verified identity confirmation steps used at account origination Without such proof, the claim that I remain responsible is unsupported. Internal Records Do Not Override Identity Theft Navy Federals statement that they confirmed accurate reporting to the nationwide credit reporting agencies does not address the legitimacy of the account itself. Reporting accuracy is separate from authorization. If an account is fraudulently opened and accurately reported as delinquent, it is still fraudulent. Accuracy of reporting does not cure fraudulent origin. The central issue is not whether the account charged off. The issue is whether I opened it. I did not. Burden of Proof The burden of proof should not fall on a victim of identity theft to prove they did not open an account. The burden must fall on the institution asserting that a valid contract exists. If Navy Federal claims I entered into a contractual agreement, then they must demonstrate : Offer Acceptance Consideration Mutual assent Identity theft eliminates mutual assent. Failure to Recognize FTC Identity Theft Report An FTC Identity Theft Report is a legally recognized document. I filed one because this account is not mine. Navy Federals response does not acknowledge the weight of this documentation. Instead, they state their investigation found the claim unsupported. That conclusion appears to be based solely on internal file review rather than independent verification of authorization. A proper fraud investigation requires more than confirming data matches. Harm Caused by Continued Reporting The continued reporting of this fraudulent account has caused significant harm, including : Negative impact to my credit score Damage to my financial reputation Increased difficulty obtaining credit Emotional distress Time and expense addressing disputes This harm continues as long as the account remains on my credit file. The Account Was Not Mine To be clear : I did not apply for a Navy Federal credit card in XX/XX/XXXX. I did not authorize any transactions. I did not make purchases on this account. I did not agree to repayment terms. I did not receive statements or bills for legitimate use. Any alleged documentation was created using my stolen personal information. Repeated Disputes Show Ongoing Fraud The fact that this matter has been disputed multiple times does not make it invalid. It demonstrates persistence in correcting an inaccuracy. Fraud does not become legitimate simply because it has been disputed before. If a fraudulent account remains on a credit report, the consumer has every right to continue disputing it until it is removed. Requested Fair Resolution A fair resolution requires the following : Immediate and permanent deletion of the Navy Federal credit card tradeline from all credit reporting agencies. Removal of all late payments, charge-off status, and derogatory remarks. Cancellation of any alleged outstanding balance. Written confirmation that I am not financially responsible for this account. Prevention of reinsertion of this account in the future. Notification to all credit bureaus that the account was the result of identity theft. Inadequacy of Navy Federals Investigation Navy Federals response references an investigation completed on XX/XX/XXXX. However, the response does not explain : What specific documents were reviewed What fraud indicators were considered Whether forensic identity review was conducted Whether signature verification was performed Whether device fingerprinting was analyzed Simply stating that no credible evidence of fraud was found does not explain how that determination was reached. Transparency is required in identity theft investigations. Charge-Off Status Does Not Prove Ownership The fact that the account charged off in XX/XX/XXXX does not prove that I was the borrower. Fraudulent accounts frequently charge off when perpetrators abandon them. Charge-off is evidence of nonpaymentnot evidence of consent. Contractual Validity Requires Consent For a retail credit agreement to be valid, consent must exist. Identity theft eliminates consent. Without consent, no valid contract exists. Without a valid contract, no enforceable debt exists. Without enforceable debt, no lawful basis exists for continued reporting. Continued Reporting After Notice Navy Federal was placed on notice that the account was fraudulent when I filed disputes and submitted an identity theft report. Continuing to report after receiving notice of identity theft increases harm and demonstrates failure to properly resolve the matter. Good Faith Cooperation I have acted in good faith by : Filing an FTC Identity Theft Report Submitting disputes Cooperating with credit bureaus Responding to requests for documentation I am not refusing to pay a legitimate debt. I am refusing responsibility for a debt that is not mine. Conclusion Navy Federal Credit Unions response does not resolve the issue. It reiterates internal records without providing proof of authorization. The account was opened fraudulently. I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report. I have consistently denied ownership. A fair resolution requires deletion of the account and written confirmation of non-responsibility. Until that occurs, the matter remains unresolved. I respectfully request that Navy Federal conduct a thorough, transparent fraud investigation focused on authorizationnot internal data repetitionand permanently remove this account from my credit file.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief