Consumer complaint received 2026-04-10 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Money order, traveler's check or cashier's check
Issue: Problem with customer service — 
Company: FIRST TECHNOLOGY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
Narrative/ Description of the Incident Issue : Mishandling of financial instruments, contradictory policies, bad-faith customer service, and discriminatory capital blocking. Complaint Details : I am filing a formal complaint against Digital Federal Credit Union ( DCU ) for severe operational negligence, deceptive practices, and the discriminatory blocking of a verified {$10000.00} business check on XX/XX/year>. DCU personnel bypassed standard verification protocols across two branches, provided conflicting policy explanations, and falsified an internal investigation to cover up their mishandling. 1. The XXXX XXXX Delay & Admitted Fault : I first presented a check from a known DCU member with a history of clearing checks exceeding {$16000.00} at the XXXX XXXX to an employee appearing to be of XXXX descent. I was delayed and denied. Later, on a recorded phone call, a female DCU customer service manager admitted fault, promising to " make it up to me '' and stating the XXXX employee required " proper training '' due to her mishandling. Even later, after the funds had already been withdrawn elsewhere, a XXXX XXXX called to retroactively claim a " 48-hour hold. '' DCU 's official written response fabricated a different excuse entirely, claiming the branch simply " did not have the denominations. '' 2. The XXXX Branch Subjective Denial & Erased Personnel : Following the XXXX denial, I proceeded to the XXXX branch. A female branch manager ( appearing to be light-skinned XXXX XXXX or XXXX ) bypassed standard ID verification. When I noted that the XXXX branch had successfully scanned the check, she stated, " Different branch, different management, '' actively rejecting standardized corporate policy. With a confrontational attitude, she refused the transaction publicly in the lobby, stating : " I am not comfortable cashing this check... besides, it's a {$10000.00} check. '' DCUs official investigation omitted this employee entirely, falsely attributing the interaction to a manager named " XXXX '' and falsely claiming the check was denied because of " illegible ink. '' 3. Institutional Evasion & Contradictory Policies : Over a logged 52-minute customer service call, a female representative quoted a " 3-day hold, '' then a " next-day hold. '' When confronted about the discrepancy, she abandoned the call via a cold transfer. A male representative answered, forcing me to retell the entire story. I was finally transferred to the female manager who admitted the need for staff training. 4. Definitive Proof of Targeted Bad Faith : DCU 's claim of " illegible ink '' at XXXX is a proven fabrication. At XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year>, the issuing account holder walked into the exact same XXXX branch and successfully withdrew the funds. The scanner/ink was not the issue ; the hold was placed subjectively on me. Damages : DCU 's bad-faith liquidity freeze disrupted my commercial operations while I was at an auto auction, causing me to lose a time-sensitive vehicle acquisition. I request the CFPB investigate DCU 's discriminatory verification practices, their falsification of investigation records ( including the omission of personnel ), and their failure to provide standardized access to capital.

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