Consumer complaint received 2016-01-31 00:00:00
Product: Bank account or service — Checking account
Issue: Deposits and withdrawals — 
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
I opened a youth savings and checking account for my son with USAA Federal Savings Bank a few years ago. When he turned XXXX he became the primary on the accounts. He saw unauthorized transactions on the accounts on XXXX XXXX, at which time he also discovered his debit card and driver 's license were stolen. He reported the unauthorized activity to the bank the same day and they stated they would forward this information to the fraud department to investigate and get back to him. Someone mobile deposited XXXX checks in the amount of {$4500.00} each and what looks like an electronic deposit of {$2900.00} to his account and immediately withdrew {$90000.00}. He is a student so this activity should have been a red flag for the bank. We asked why someone was allowed to deposit XXXX checks via mobile phone and withdraw them without a hold of 5-7 days. The representative said she was only taking the report and we could speak to someone in another department regarding that. Once the report was completed she transferred us to another department and we were never given a clear answer why something like this was not caught sooner by the bank and the account put on hold until resolved. Instead, my son never received a return call, he called them and was told he was being held responsible and they no longer wanted to do business with him. They gave him no reason or supporting information on what they found during their investigation. He requested this information and was sent from department to department until he was frustrated and hung up. He sent written requests asking for their findings after the investigation and they never responded. Instead, the following day after they received the second set of written requests, they closed his account. This was just very unexpected from USAA because I have been a loyal customer for over 20 years and they have always provided the best customer service. In this instance, it seems like they allowed suspicious transactions that should have been flagged to proceed and now they are holding my son and now me ( because they have added my name back to all correspondence ) now that they have " determined '' these were not unauthorized transactions. Yet, how did they come to this conclusion, did they determine who uploaded the mobile checks?, do they have ATM footage of the person ( s ) who withdrew the funds?, etc. The withdrawals were in {$400.00} - {$500.00} increments so they should have ATM footage. Did they check the XXXX XXXX to see if they have footage of the first unauthorized transaction listed as a debit or credit card transaction? All around us people are gaining access to consumer information fraudulently ( health records, retailers, banks, etc. ) and identity theft is becoming more widespread, what is a consumer to do? My son did what he was supposed to do, report the activity as soon as he saw it. We expected the bank to properly investigate this matter and resolve it. They state they investigated the matter and found the transactions were not fraudulent. We are saying the transactions were fraudulent and want the bank to supply my son with their findings so we can properly resolve this matter. At this point, we are being told they investigated the matter but they will not supply us with proof of this after multiple requests. They took my name off of correspondence when my son turned XXXX but now my name has been added back to correspondence since they deem the transactions our responsibility stating they XXXX report both of us to the credit reporting agencies. How can a banking institution be allowed to do this without providing supporting documentation of their findings? They did n't do their job by stopping the fraudulent transactions in a timely manner so now they blame the victims and we have no recourse? Consumers have rights victims of identity theft should not be treated like this.

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