Consumer complaint received 2026-01-22 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint regarding Navy Federal Credit Unions handling and denial of my fraud claim involving multiple unauthorized electronic fund transfers. 

In XX/XX/year>, I discovered a series of unauthorized debit card transactions made through XXXX. There were eleven XXXX charges clustered within a three-day period, including seven charges in a single day and four charges two days earlier. I did not authorize these transactions, did not receive any benefit from them, and I do not regularly use XXXX. There were also two XXXX charges that I did not recognize or authorize. 

I promptly reported the transactions to Navy Federal and followed their fraud dispute and appeal process. Despite this, my appeal was denied. Navy Federal stated that the transactions were consistent with my spending habits, but did not provide evidence that I authorized the transactions or documentation tying the rides to me, my physical location, or my device. No ride locations, account linkage, or proof of authorization was provided.

Navy Federal failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E. The institution relied on internal risk scoring and the assertion that the transactions were consistent with spending habits rather than evidence of authorization. The clustering of thirteen XXXX transactions in a short timeframe is inconsistent with normal consumer behavior and is a recognized indicator of fraud. Navy Federal did not meet its burden of demonstrating that these transactions were authorized or that I benefited from them.

Additionally, Navy Federal did not comply with Regulation E requirements related to investigation timelines and provisional credit. I was informed that no provisional or conditional credit would be provided during the investigation or appeal process. The investigation exceeded 20 days, yet no provisional credit was issued, and no written explanation was provided citing a regulatory exception for withholding provisional credit when the investigation was not completed within 10 business days. 

I was further informed that no additional appeal or review was available, effectively closing the matter without providing evidence of authorization or regulatory justification for the denial. I was also informed by a Navy Federal supervisor that the only way to reopen the investigation would be if I provided additional evidence. However, because I stated that I did not authorize or make the disputed transactions, I was not provided guidance on what evidence would be reasonably available to me. This effectively shifts the burden of proof to the consumer, despite Regulation E placing the burden on the financial institution to demonstrate authorization of disputed electronic fund transfers. 

I have also contacted XXXX directly to request transaction metadata, including whether the disputed charges were associated with my XXXX account and general ride information such as dates and locations. This information is expected to further demonstrate that the transactions were unauthorized and not attributable to me.

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