Consumer complaint received 2025-08-04 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement — Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX EST, I received a security alert from USAA XXXX XXXX attempted XXXX XXXX from my account, which I did not authorize. I immediately responded No to confirm that I had not made these transactions, and then received an automated message saying that a USAA representative would be calling me shortly. Within seconds, I received a phone call from XXXX number publicly listed as belonging to USAAs Loans in Process department. When I answered the phone, the individual on the other line introduced himself as XXXX and told me that he was calling from USAA regarding the security alert that I had responded to. He even gave me an employee identification number : XXXX. Believing the call to be legitimate from an official USAA representative, I followed his instructions to reset my online banking credentials using a weblink he provided ( a screenshot is attached ). It has since become evident that the individual was fraudulently impersonating a USAA representative and that the link was a phishing mechanism. Upon clicking the malicious link and entering my credentials, my XXXX address was compromised, and the scammer was able to use the information obtained to access my XXXX account and initiate a fraudulent transfer of funds amounting to {$6100.00}, all while disguising the activity to appear as though it was initiated by me. As a result, I had to reset my USAA login credentials twice more for added security ( once on XX/XX/XXXX and again on XXXX XXXX of this are also attached ). I had no knowledge of this transaction at the time it occurred and only became aware of it when I received a confirmation email from XXXX after the funds had already been sent. I have included screenshots of text messages I received from the scammer on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX showing the phishing link he sent me to reset my login credentials as further evidence of the fraud. 

Because I did not authorize or initiate this transaction by any means, and because I was deceived through social engineering and impersonation of a USAA representative, this situation clearly falls under the scope of USAAs Zero Liability Policy which stipulates that Iam not liable for unauthorized use of my credit card that is reported to USAA within a timely manner. Unauthorized use means the use of a credit card by someone other than the cardholder who does not have actual, implied or apparent authority for such use and from which you do not receive a direct or indirect benefit. USAA and their XXXX XXXX XXXX also stipulate that a transaction is rendered unauthorized if it was initiated by someone other than the consumer without actual authority and the consumer did not benefit from it. A consumers negligence can not be used to deny coverage, and phishing-based deception does not constitute authorization. Despite this, USAA is doing the following : -Treating this phishing-based, impersonation-induced transaction as authorized simply because it involved my IP address. 
-Dismissing submitted evidence and issuing contradictory communications. 
-Denying liability in violation of both Regulation E and its Zero Liability Policy. 

On XX/XX/year>, I received a letter from XXXX Fraud Investigation Department stating that I would be held responsible for the transaction. The notice referenced a conclusion made by USAA investigator XXXX XXXX, who arbitrarily determined that I had authorized the transfer. 
In response, I escalated the matter by submitting supporting evidence on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>, including : -A screenshot of the phishing link I clicked to reset my login.

-A formal letter detailing the full context of the scam, the impersonation of a USAA representative, and how the fraud was executed. 
Despite this, on XX/XX/year>, I received XXXX contradictory documents from USAA : XXXX stated that USAA had not received any supporting documentation. 
The other confirmed that I would remain responsible for the fraudulent transaction as a result. 
This reflects a breakdown in USAAs internal case handling and an outright dismissal of the valid evidence I submitted. 

Even as of today, XX/XX/year>, my supporting documents that I submitted have still not been delivered to the appropriate USAA representative for further review ( despite their request to allow up to XXXX XXXX  ).

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief