Consumer complaint received 2026-07-21 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account — Transaction was not authorized
Company: FIRST TECHNOLOGY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: OR

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this single, formal complaint against First Tech Federal Credit Union for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX transfer protections, arbitrary denial of my fraud disputes, and a failure to conduct a reasonable investigation into multiple highly suspicious transactions on my account. As a vulnerable consumer with a XXXX, I am targeted by predatory practices, and my financial institution failed its duty to protect my funds. XXXX. The Disputed Transactions and Merchant Failures My account was subjected to severe financial errors and unauthorized activity involving multiple large transactions totaling XXXX ( XXXX gift card XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX ) : Unauthorized Debit Card Charges : XXXX large transactions were executed using my debit card credentials without my knowledge, permission, or consent. I did not authorize these charges, did not benefit from them, and immediately alerted my credit union. Services Not Rendered ( Airline Tickets ) : A separate transaction was processed for airline tickets through a vendor named XXXX. Due to deceptive/hidden ticketing terms that were not disclosed to me, the airline refused to let me board at the airport, and I was unable to use the return flight. Services were completely unrendered. XXXX. Violation of Federal Law : XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Upon alerting the credit union to these issues, the institution completely failed to comply with federal error resolution procedures mandated under XXXX XXXX ( XXXX CFR Part XXXX ) : Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ( c ) ) : The XXXX XXXX summarily closed my fraud case within XXXX hours over a weekend. It is logistically impossible for a financial institution to conduct a comprehensive, good-faith investigation into separate merchant accounts, digital footprints, and network settlement data within a weekend timeline. A similar event happened with their investigation with XXXX Erroneous and Impossible Technical Determinations : The representative assigned to my case claimed the transactions must be authorized because " a PIN was used. '' This conclusion is factually and technologically invalid. At least XXXX of the disputed charges was an online order where a physical debit card PIN is never transmitted or required for settlement. The XXXX XXXX used a blanket excuse to deny my claims without looking at the actual merchant data. XXXX. Violation of Oregon XXXX XXXX Under Oregon Revised Statutes ( ORS ) XXXX XXXX, credit unions operating within Oregon must maintain safe, XXXX practices and strictly adhere to standard consumer protections. Furthermore, under XXXX XXXX ( Financial Exploitation of Vulnerable Persons ), financial entities face heightened scrutiny when handling accounts of individuals with recognized XXXX who are targeted by bad actors. I suffer from carbon monoxide poisoning that severely damaged my cognitive abilities, which makes it difficult for me to understand these things. Thats why I am on XXXX as a fully XXXX man. I have a caregiver who is helping write this, a POA. Everything that would make a person vulnerable to these sorts of illegitimate buisnesses. By conducting a cursory, XXXX review and completely dismissing my claims, the XXXX XXXX exposed me to severe financial exploitation and failed their fiduciary duty of care.

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 explanation