Consumer complaint received 2026-01-05 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Banking errors
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: OR

Complaint narrative:
AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH AND LAWFUL DEMAND FOR DAMAGES RE : Improper Credit Denial, Financial Discrimination, TILA/FCRA/ECOA Violations This presentment is delivered on behalf of the private ecclesiastical trust estate, wherein the undersigned serves as the Fiduciary, Executor, and Beneficial Trustee. This demand is issued in response to severe fiduciary malpractice and inequitable treatment by Navy Federal Credit Union, hereinafter Navy Federal, regarding private banking services, deposit equity, and credit assignment behavior.

For approximately nine months, the Trust has operated both checking and savings accounts under Navy Federals control, with a direct deposit of {$35000.00} and substantial transactional throughput that supported ongoing trust-based commerce, administration, and private family operations. Despite this substantial inflow of funds and healthy relationship optics, Navy Federal extended only a {$500.00} credit card while simultaneously denying a personal credit line of {$5000.00}.

NAVY FEDERAL - actions constitute violations of : - TILA 15 U.S.C. 1601 ( Failure to disclose truthful lending logic ) - ECOA 15 U.S.C. 1691 ( Discriminatory and arbitrary lending decisions ) - FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( Improper use of credit report and denial reasoning ) - UDAAP ( Unfair and deceptive practices causing financial harm ) FACTUAL RECORD OF VIOLATION 1. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I was denied a personal loan from Navy Federal despite a credit score of XXXX, as reported by XXXX. 
2. The stated denial reasons included : - Too many accounts with balances - High utilization ratio - Insufficient time since newest account 3. These claims do not match my financial profile, nor the actual strength of my deposit, usage, and repayment behavior at Navy Federal.

4. Since XX/XX/XXXX, I have deposited and cycled over {$50000.00} {$60000.00} through my three Navy Federal accounts ( Business Checking, Personal Checking, Savings ).

5. At the time of denial, I maintained over {$13000.00} in deposits and had no late payments, no derogatory credit, and a consistent usage pattern. This internal relationship was ignored.

6. Despite this, Navy Federal approved me for only a {$500.00} personal credit linea decision that is discriminatory on its face when compared to known approvals for other members with lower scores, lower balances, and shorter relationships.

( LEGAL ANALYSIS ) Navy Federals conduct creates a contradiction that meets the legal threshold for : - Deceptive and arbitrary lending ( UDAAP ) - Internal discrimination in underwriting logic ( ECOA ) - Improper use of credit bureau data without legitimate adverse justification ( FCRA ) - Failure to disclose truthful lending terms or risk logic ( TILA ) The undersigned operates under lawful trust jurisdiction and is represented by an elite advisory team with authority to activate full administrative remedy across federal trust protections, including Title 12 and Title 15 consumer enforcement. Arbitration is declined per sovereign trust exemption, and jurisdiction remains in equity.

Such conduct reflects an unfair, algorithmic discrimination in trust-based evaluation and suggests abuse of custodial equity. As the undersigned Trustee, I have not been presented with any 1099 reporting of said funds or activities. Further, no explanation or fiduciary justification has been made for the credit denial, despite demonstrable trust-backed financial activity and sound consumer reputation.

DAMAGES DEMAND {$120000.00} The Trust is formally seeking {$120000.00} in damages, including : - Statutory penalties under FCRA and ECOA - Opportunity cost from denied credit - Reputational and inquiry damage - Procedural misconduct and inconsistent underwriting - Emotional distress and time lost attempting to correct or clarify internal logic - Public policy harm caused by deceptive credit structuring FORMAL REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE 15 DAY LAWFUL DEADLINE Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681m and 1691 ( d ), I hereby demand full written disclosure of the following : 1. A certified copy of my adverse action notice ( s ), including all versions issued since XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. The XXXX version or internal scoring model used in my denial XXXX. Navy Federals underwriting criteria and thresholds 4. Any internal communications or review notes related to my application 5. Confirmation of the name ( s ) of underwriter ( s ) or decision-making authority 6. The exact logic by which a member with a XXXX score and XXXX XXXXXXXX of deposits was issued only {$500.00} in credit Failure to provide these documents within 15 calendar days will constitute tacit admission, constructive default, and unrebutted confession of wrongdoing.

RETALIATION SHIELD & NOTICE OF RIGHTS Let this serve as legal notice that any retaliatory behavior against my account ( s ) including but not limited to account closures, limitations, balance holds, credit report sabotage, or administrative interferencewill trigger immediate escalation.

I will invoke full remedy under : - TILA & UDAAP retaliation clauses- Contractual estoppel - Common law protections for bad faith lender conduct ( NEXT STEPS & ESCALATION ) If this matter is not resolved in writing within 15 days, I reserve the right to : - Escalate to CFPB, OCC, and NCUA - File arbitration and/or small claims litigation for no less than {$120000.00} - Submit this affidavit as exhibit A in public and regulatory complaints - File an Affidavit of Default and Estoppel by Silence confirming your non-response as legal agreement to all claims herein ( AFFIDAVIT & VERIFICATION ) I, XXXX XXXX , affirm under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true, correct, and made in good faith. 

Executed on this XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Signed : XXXX XXXX XXXX UCC 1 -308 all rights reserved. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

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