Consumer complaint received 2026-05-28 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: IDAHO CENTRAL CREDIT UNION
State: ID

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, my account was charged a series of repetitive and unusually large amounts from XXXX. My son has an account, but he was not allowed on gaming systems that day, and I learned that a child unrelated to us and only visiting our home, made these purchases on my account. I swiftly contacts both XXXX and XXXX, both of which denied me without any sort of investigation or further inquiry. I submitted a dispute to my bank ( Idaho Central Credit Union ) the following day on XX/XX/year> concerning four identical charges of {$95.00}, and one lesser charge of {$2.00} for a total of {$380.00}. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email confirmation that ICCU was still investigating my dispute and thanking me for my patience. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email confirmation that ICCU had resolved my dispute and considered the provisonary credit of one of the four {$95.00} charges as permanent- meaning they acknowledged that one transaction in a series was fraudulent. On XX/XX/XXXX, I got an email from ICCU explaining that XXXX was objecting my dispute for the other three {$95.00} charges. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from ICCU informing me that no error occurred with the other XXXX {$95.00} charges and the {$2.00} charge on the basis that my son owned the account. I explained that it didn't make sense that one of four identical charges would be considered erroronous while the other three would be considered valid. On XX/XX/XXXX, they sent me the following message in response : " The permanent credit was given for the other transactions due to the merchant giving that credit, but the remaining transactions they gave responses to showing that this is connected to your sons account. The card was added to this account and authorized for purchases. '' I sent the following in response on XX/XX/XXXX : " Hi, I would like any documentation you received as well as any evidence you used for my denial. I would also like to better understand why one of the four charges was refunded while the other three identical charges were denied. I understand XXXX approved one, which resulted in the resolve, but I'm having a difficult time understanding why only one transaction in a series of identical transactions at the same time would be considered invalid. As I've stated before, neither me ( the authorized card user ) or my son ( the authorized account user ) consented to these purchases. The transactions involved repetitive charges of the same unusually large amount, which indicates that they were unauthorized. Under Regulation E section m, the CFPB states " Unauthorized electronic fund transfer means an electronic fund transfer from a consumer 's account initiated by a person other than the consumer without actual authority to initiate the transfer and from which the consumer receives no benefit. " These transactions were in succession and far beyond any amount ever used by this account before. I notified both XXXX and ICCU immediately upon discovering these transactions that they were unauthorized. For these reasons, I am hoping for an escalated review of this case and a favorable resolution ; but I am also intending to pursue further review through other channels via a submission of a complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau if necessary. Thank you, XXXX '' I have still received no response to that email as of XX/XX/XXXX, but the bank did withdraw {$280.00} from my account today to reclaim the provision credit they initially gave me for this dispute.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief