Consumer complaint received 2026-01-27 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems — Problem with cash advances
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF GOOD FAITH Before detailing the specific regulatory violations, the Complainant wishes to state for the record that this filing is submitted in good faith to preserve, rather than dissolve, the banking relationship. The Complainant values his membership with Navy Federal Credit Union and has no desire or intent to close these accounts. This action is taken solely to compel the correction of specific billing errors and to ensure institutional adherence to federal consumer protection laws which, to date, have not been addressed through standard customer service channels. 



SUMMARY I am filing this formal complaint against Navy Federal Credit Union ( NFCU ) due to their failure to adhere to federal billing regulations, improper payment allocation under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), and systemic customer service failures that resulted in compounding fees and financial harm. Despite multiple attempts to resolve these matters directly, NFCU has provided conflicting information and failed to reconcile clear mathematical errors on my accounts. 




STATEMENT OF FACTS PART A : Payment Allocation & Regulation Z Dispute ( Visa Account # XXXX ) On XX/XX/year>, I made a payment significantly in excess of the minimum required on my CashRewards Visa. Under 12 CFR 1026.53 ( a ) ( Regulation Z ), payments exceeding the minimum must be applied to the balance with the highest APR first ( in this case, the Cash Advance balance ). 
The Issue : NFCU misapplied these funds, leaving the high-interest Cash Advance balance active while applying funds to lower-APR purchase balances.

The Harm : This has caused {$680.00} to continue accruing interest improperly. When I contacted support, I was told interest would accrue until the entire card was zeroa statement that directly contradicts federal " Highest APR First '' allocation mandates. 
PART B : Billing Error & Over-Limit Dispute ( Visa Account # XXXX ) On XX/XX/year>, a charge of {$630.00} from the XXXX XXXX Treasurer was processed. 
The Issue : The charge was erroneously duplicated or mishandled. While a " reversal '' appeared, the reversal amount ( {$680.00} ) did not match the original charge. 
The Harm : Because of this discrepancy, my account now reflects an inflated balance of XXXX XXXXexceeding my {$1500.00} limit. I am being charged interest and potentially over-limit fees on a balance that exists solely due to NFCU 's inability to reconcile a mathematical error. 


PART C : Business Account Mismanagement & Fee Compounding ( Business Account # XXXX ) I experienced a technical issue with my PIN at an ATM. 
The Issue : After several failed attempts resulting in {$1.00} fees, I contacted NFCU for immediate assistance to reset the PIN and prevent further fees. The first representative failed to provide the necessary support. 
The Harm : Due to the lack of effective support, I made subsequent attempts that accrued further fees. While a second representative eventually assisted, the initial negligence caused unnecessary financial depletion and operational disruption to my business, XXXX XXXX XXXX. 


III. LEGAL BASIS FOR DISPUTE 1. Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) & Regulation Z : NFCU is in violation of payment allocation requirements by failing to apply excess payments to the highest APR balance first.

2. Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) : The discrepancy in the XXXX XXXX Treasurer reversal constitutes a " billing error '' ( mathematical inaccuracy ) which NFCU has failed to correct within the required statutory timeframe.

3. Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) : Regarding the business account, the failure to provide adequate support to a member attempting to rectify a transaction error led to avoidable fees and financial distress.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation