Consumer complaint received 2026-06-12 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Navy Federal Credit Union for serious violations of the Uniform Commercial Code Article 9 in the disposition of the collateral on my auto loan account ending XXXX. I am a documented victim of identity theft and mail theft. I have on file FTC Identity Theft Reports # XXXX and # XXXX, XXXX Mail Theft Case # XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX Report # XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I was outside the United States from XX/XX/XXXX through XXXX XXXX and was the subject of a separate property crime incident in XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. ACCOUNT AT ISSUE : Navy Federal auto loan ending XXXX, secured by a XXXX XXXX XXXX ( VIN XXXX ). On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a Navy Federal " Explanation of Deficiency '' letter informing me for the first time that the vehicle had been sold on XX/XX/XXXX, for {$21000.00}, and that Navy Federal claims I owe a deficiency of {$5500.00}. I never received any pre-sale notice. Georgia O.C.G.A. 11-9-611, 11-9-613, and 11-9-614 required Navy Federal to send me written notification of the intended disposition of the collateral BEFORE the sale. The first communication I received about the sale was the XX/XX/XXXX letter 76 days after the sale itself. Under O.C.G.A. 11-9-626, when a secured party fails to comply with Article 9 notification requirements, the secured party is presumed to have realized the entire unpaid obligation from the disposition, and no deficiency is collectible. Navy Federal has not produced any pre-sale notice and bears the burden of doing so. The XX/XX/XXXX letter has additional problems on its face : 1. The " Total Obligation Secured '' is calculated as of XX/XX/XXXX six days AFTER the XX/XX/XXXX sale. There is no contractual or statutory basis for accruing additional interest on the obligation between the sale date and a later calculation date. 2. The {$2100.00} in " Repossession Expenses Incurred, Including Expenses of Retaking, Holding, Preparing for Disposition, Processing and Disposing of Collateral '' is reported as a single lumped figure with no itemization. Under O.C.G.A. 11-9-616 I am entitled to an explanation of the calculation. An unitemized lump sum is not an explanation. 3. The letter shows {$0.00} in " Credits to the Borrower '' meaning Navy Federal applied none of the {$21000.00} sale proceeds in any way that benefited me. I also want this complaint to address what Navy Federal Credit Union represents itself to be. Navy Federal holds itself out as a member-driven not-for-profit credit union operating on a relationship-based model distinct from for-profit banks. The conduct above silently repossessing collateral, selling it 76 days before notifying me, calculating obligation as of a date after the sale, and producing a deficiency demand without itemization or pre-sale notice is not how a member-driven institution treats a member it is supposed to serve. Whatever procedural minimum a for-profit bank may owe a consumer, a credit union holding itself out on member-relationship terms owes more than this. I dispute the deficiency in its entirety pending Navy Federal 's production of the records required by Georgia law and consistent with the conduct it represents to members.

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