Consumer complaint received 2025-11-21 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: MOUNTAIN AMERICA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: UT

Complaint narrative:
This is a follow-up to my initial complaint against Mountain America Credit Union ( MACU ). After the CFPB contacted the bank, MACU called me and informed me that they are upholding their denial. Their explanations contained multiple inaccuracies, misapplications of Regulation E, and statements that contradict federal consumer-protection requirements.

First, A MACU representative also told me that the credit union is not insured for frauds and scams and that their insurance only covers members deposits if the credit union fails. This was in response to my question about coverage and was presented as a reason they could not reimburse me. While she did not state that insurance was the basis of the denial, this explanation is misleading because Regulation E reimbursement obligations are not dependent on any type of insurance coverage. Fraud liability is statutory and does not rely on insurance. Providing incomplete or incorrect information about how fraud claims are funded misrepresents my rights as a consumer.

Second, MACU told me they are not going after XXXX because XXXX has no record of the transaction. XXXX informed me that the XXXXXXXX XXXX  involved in the scam was deleted shortly after the fraud occurred. Under Regulation XXXX, the burden is on the bank to determine whether the transfer was authorized not on the merchant. A merchants inability to provide documentation does NOT justify a denial. Merchant documentation is optional and can not replace a proper consumer authorization analysis. 

Third, the bank again categorized this as an authorized transaction despite the fact that it was a deception-based impersonation scam. The scammer spoofed MACUs text message system, used a phone number displaying as MACU, referenced the exact fraud-alert text I received, kept me on the phone for over two hours, and instructed me to transfer funds under the belief that I was preventing fraud with the banks own security department. This meets the definition of an unauthorized electronic funds transfer under 12 CFR 1005.2 ( m ) : I did not actually authorize a transfer to the person who received the funds, and the transaction was induced through fraudulent misrepresentation.

Fourth, I notified MACU immediately after the call ended that the transaction was fraudulent and asked them NOT to let it go through. The branch told me they had to let it go through so they could catch the scammers, and the transaction posted AFTER I attempted to revoke authorization. Under Regulation E, once a consumer reports that a transfer was unauthorized before settlement, the bank must take reasonable steps to stop or mitigate the transfer. Allowing the transfer to intentionally proceed is contrary to their obligations. Additionally, when I immediately went into a MACU branch to report the fraud, I was told they could not take my dispute yet and that I had to return the next business day after the transaction posted. This contradicts Regulation E, which requires a financial institution to accept notice of an unauthorized transfer immediately. Their refusal to accept my dispute allowed the fraudulent transfer to finalize and prevented timely
investigation. Combined with the statement that they had to let it go through, MACU failed to take reasonable steps to stop or mitigate an unauthorized transfer after I reported it.

Fifth, MACU has not provided : Any evidence that I authorized the transaction Any investigation notes Any documentation supporting their classification as authorized Any relevant Regulation E analysis Any basis for relying on XXXX  non-response or XXXX XXXX deletion Instead, the only justification provided during the post-CFPB call was misinformation about insurance and the merchant. 

Finally, this fraud caused significant downstream harm, including loss of access to my XXXX ID, data compromise ( including personal and business documents such as my birth certificate, Social Security number, and business passwords ), replacement of my phone, and re-establishment of business accounts across multiple insurance carriers due to the breach. 

I am requesting that the CFPB require MACU to : Reopen and properly investigate the claim under Regulation E Refund the unauthorized transaction Provide a written explanation citing the specific Regulation E provision used to deny the claim Provide documentation and evidence supporting their finding of authorization Explain why they allowed the transaction to process even after I alerted them immediately MACUs handling of this case violates both the XXXX and letter of Regulation XXXX and misinforms consumers about their rights. I am requesting CFPB enforcement and correction of the improper denial.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation