Consumer complaint received 2026-02-24 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Problem using a debit or ATM card
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding USAA Federal Savings Banks handling of my debit card dispute involving merchant non-performance. On XX/XX/XXXX, I used my USAA debit card to purchase a six-year home warranty plan from First Premier Home Warranty in the amount of {$2500.00}. The transaction appeared on my statement ending XX/XX/XXXX. Beginning in XX/XX/XXXX, I filed three service claims under the warranty ( septic system, hot water heater, and well pump ). No services were completed and no cash-in-lieu payments were ever received, despite being marked as processed by the merchant. Two claims were converted to cash-in-lieu agreements with a promised 45-business-day payment timeline, but no payments were issued. A third claim was blocked due to undisclosed restrictions that were not communicated at the time of purchase or claim filing. I was later prevented from canceling and denied a prorated refund. The dispute was filed with USAA on XX/XX/XXXX, after it became clear that services were not being provided and promised payments were not issued. The debit transaction itself was authorized and valid at the time of purchase. The error arose later when the merchant failed to perform its contractual obligations and failed to issue promised payments. The dispute arises from merchant non-performance beginning in XX/XX/XXXX, not from the original purchase date. USAA initially issued a provisional credit but reversed it in XX/XX/XXXX after determining no error occurred. Since XX/XX/XXXX, this dispute has been reviewed, denied, or resubmitted a total of seven times. In the most recent denial dated XX/XX/XXXX, USAA stated that notification of the dispute was outside the required timeframe referenced in the deposit agreement. However, the dispute was filed shortly after it became reasonably clear that services were not being provided and payments were not issued. Despite seven reviews, the merchant has not provided proof of completed services, signed work orders, paid invoices, or proof of payment delivery. The documentation consists only of a policy document and claim assignment confirmations, which do not demonstrate that contracted services were performed. Exhibit 8 contains the documentation provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and relied upon by USAA in its investigation. This documentation consists of a merchant response letter, warranty invoice, and transaction authorization summary. It does not include proof of completed services, signed work orders, repair invoices, or proof that cash-in-lieu payments were issued or delivered. I respectfully request review of whether reliance on this documentation satisfies the requirement for a reasonable investigation under Regulation E in a merchant non-performance dispute. I am concerned that USAA has not conducted a reasonable and consistent investigation as required under Regulation E. Specifically, I believe USAA is calculating the notification period based solely on the original transaction date rather than the date the error became reasonably discoverable due to merchant non-performance. The repeated rework of this case, reversal of provisional credit without proof of merchant performance, and shifting reasoning across multiple denials raise concerns about the adequacy and consistency of the investigation process. I respectfully request a full executive-level review of this matter and appropriate corrective action consistent with Regulation E requirements.

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 monetary relief