Consumer complaint received 2025-12-30 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Sued you in a state where you do not live or did not sign for the debt
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this feedback to formally state that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX response does not resolve my complaint, does not address verified fraud findings, and does not comply with federal consumer protection requirements. I am also submitting this feedback in connection with a new CFPB case, as my previous case number XXXX was closed without resolution, despite new and material information confirming fraud. 

XXXX. This Is a New Case Based on Newly Confirmed Fraud This feedback is submitted as part of a new CFPB case, because Case No. XXXX was closed, and subsequent developments materially change the nature of the dispute. 

After the prior case was closed, XXXX notified me that I was a victim of fraud related to information appearing on my credit report. Based on XXXX notification and findings, I took immediate and appropriate action by : Filing an FTC Identity Theft Report Filing an identity theft affidavit Disputing the account again based on confirmed fraud This information was not meaningfully addressed in Navy Federal Credit Unions response. 

XXXX. Navy Federals Response Fails to Address Verified Fraud Navy Federals response focuses on internal account history and bankruptcy references, but it fails to acknowledge or address the confirmed fraud determination communicated to me by XXXX. 

Navy Federal states that an account was opened, used, and paid. However, restating internal account activity does not prove that I am the person who opened or authorized the account. The issue is not whether an account exists in Navy Federals systemthe issue is identity theft. 

Once fraud has been identified and documented, the burden shifts to the furnisher to demonstrate authorization with competent evidence. 

XXXX. I Filed an FTC Identity Theft Report After Being Notified of Fraud After XXXX informed me that I was a victim of fraud, I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report, which is the federally recognized mechanism for documenting identity theft. 

This filing legally triggers additional obligations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, including : Heightened investigation requirements Blocking of fraudulent information Prohibition on continued reporting absent proof of authorization Navy Federals response does not mention the FTC report, does not acknowledge identity theft, and does not explain how fraud allegations were investigated. 

XXXX. No Proof of Authorization Was Provided Navy Federal did not provide : A signed credit application A signed cardholder agreement Proof of identity verification at account opening Authentication records Evidence that I consented to or benefited from the account Without this documentation, Navy Federal has not met its obligations under FCRA 623 to demonstrate that the information it is furnishing is accurate. 

Asserting accuracy without proof is not a reasonable investigation. 

XXXX. Bankruptcy References Do Not Validate a Fraudulent Account Navy Federal references a XXXX XXXXXXXX bankruptcy filing as part of its justification. However, bankruptcy references do not establish account ownership, particularly when identity theft is involved. 

Additionally, XXXX has separately indicated that bankruptcy records associated with my credit file were fraudulent, which further undermines reliance on those records to justify continued reporting of this account. 

Fraudulent public records can not be used to validate a fraudulent tradeline. 

XXXX. Navy Federals Statement of Accuracy Is Conclusory Navy Federal states that it is reporting accurate information, but does not explain : What documents were reviewed Whether a manual investigation occurred How identity theft was ruled out What evidence ties me to the account Federal law requires a reasonable investigation, not a reaffirmation of prior assumptions. 

XXXX. Continued Reporting Causes Ongoing Harm Because Navy Federal continues to furnish this account as a valid tradeline, I continue to experience : Credit score damage False representation of delinquency Barriers to credit access Repeated dispute burden This harm persists despite fraud being identified and documented. 

XXXX. Why CFPB Oversight Is Still Necessary Although the prior case was closed, this new case is supported by new evidence, including XXXX fraud notification and my FTC Identity Theft filing. 

This feedback is submitted so the CFPB has a clear record that : Fraud has been identified A federal identity theft report was filed Navy Federal did not meaningfully investigate fraud Proof of authorization was not provided The issue remains unresolved Conclusion I am opening this new CFPB case because Case No. XXXX was closed without resolution, and I was later notified by XXXX that I was a victim of fraud. Based on that notification, I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and identity theft documentation, yet Navy Federal Credit Unions response still fails to address fraud, fails to provide proof of authorization, and fails to comply with federal consumer protection law. 

This feedback is submitted so the CFPB is aware that Navy Federals response does not resolve the dispute, and that inaccurate reporting remains ongoing despite verified fraud.

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