Consumer complaint received 2026-07-08 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Banking errors
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: IA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, USAA 's Bill Pay system generated two separate payment transactions to the same payee ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, our electric cooperative ) from our joint checking account. Each transaction withdrew {$260.00} from our account, for a total of {$520.00}. The two transactions have different reference numbers, confirming that USAA 's system initiated two distinct payments. The payee confirmed on two separate occasions ( XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ) that they received only one payment of {$260.00}. USAA withdrew {$260.00} from our account without authorization. My wife contacted USAA on XX/XX/XXXX to report the error. The first agent had difficulty locating the duplicate transaction and acknowledged " the system must have done it. '' Despite this acknowledgment, USAA processed the correction as a customer dispute subject to a 10-business-day investigation window, rather than correcting their own system error. My wife made XXXX phone calls on XX/XX/XXXX ( to USAA, to the payee, and back to USAA ) to document the issue and open the dispute ( case XXXX ). On XX/XX/XXXX, my wife called again after no resolution. She was told the investigation could take 7-10 business days. She asked to speak with a supervisor but was denied access. She was transferred to the retention department, where a representative named XXXX filed a complaint ( case XXXX ) and told her it would be visible in her USAA profile. It is not visible in either of our profiles. A subsequent representative on XX/XX/XXXX confirmed the complaint exists internally but said customers can not see complaints, directly contradicting what my wife was told. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called USAA for a follow-up. After approximately 15 minutes on hold, I was routed to the credit card department due to overflow, then transferred back to banking and held for another 20 minutes. The banking specialist ( XXXX XXXX confirmed that the duplicate transaction reference number does not appear on USAA 's " PayBill platform '' despite showing as a withdrawal on our account. She confirmed there are no investigation updates, no documents, and no identified root cause. She also volunteered that this is not an isolated incident, stating this is " not the first call we've had today regarding transactions going back at least a month from several members calling in about the same issue. '' She indicated USAA underwent a system change approximately XXXX month ago that introduced the problem. XXXX could not address compensation for our time and effort and transferred me to the Member Resolution Team. XXXX on that team confirmed this is a known issue and referenced an internal memo sent on XX/XX/XXXX ( one day after our transactions ) regarding the problem. XXXX stated USAA has no process to compensate customers for time spent resolving bank-originated errors. He confirmed his supervisors do not take escalation calls and that the Member Resolution Team is the final internal escalation point. When asked what USAA would do to make this right beyond returning our money, his answer was nothing. On XX/XX/XXXX, following the call, I emailed USAA 's executive communications office summarizing the issue and requesting resolution by close of business Tuesday, XX/XX/XXXX. I indicated that a CFPB complaint would be filed if the matter was not resolved. No response was received. As of XX/XX/XXXX ( business day XXXX ), USAA 's 10-business-day investigation window has expired. On XX/XX/XXXX, USAA applied a permanent credit of {$260.00} to our account with no accompanying explanation or notification. On XX/XX/XXXX, a representative from USAA 's CEO 's office called to follow up on our executive communications email. She confirmed the permanent credit, stated the provisional credit would be reversed once finalized, and acknowledged USAA 's IT team is aware of and working to resolve the issue. She offered to provide a written response but cautioned that exact root cause details may not be included. She declined to offer any compensation for time and effort, citing the depository agreement 's " reasonable time to correct '' clause. As of this filing, the three remaining items from our executive communications demand are unresolved : written root cause documentation, written confirmation the defect is remediated, and compensation for six phone calls and multiple hours spent resolving a bank-originated error over 20 days. A known systemic issue is affecting multiple customers, USAA has acknowledged it internally via memo, and despite the CEO office outreach today, three of our four requested remedies remain outstanding. This complaint is particularly concerning in light of USAA 's XXXX CFPB consent order requiring payment of {$15.00} XXXX for violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E, including failing to honor stop-payment requests and failing to initiate and complete reasonable error resolution investigations. The pattern here is consistent with the conduct that led to that enforcement action : a bank-originated error is being processed through a dispute framework designed for merchant/fraud issues, with no meaningful investigation updates provided to the customer within the regulatory timeframe. Additionally, the OCC issued USAA its third cease-and-desist order in five years in XX/XX/XXXX, citing IT deficiencies as a potential root cause of operational failures. We have made six phone calls -- four to USAA and two to the payee to verify payment -- plus an executive office email, totaling multiple hours over 20 days across three USAA departments and the executive communications office. USAA 's CEO 's office has since called in response, but three of our four requested remedies remain unaddressed. USAA 's internal escalation path is exhausted. We are requesting CFPB intervention.

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