Consumer complaint received 2021-07-05 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Problem caused by your funds being low — Non-sufficient funds and associated fees
Company: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
My checking account with Navy Federal Credit Union had an automatic payment ( monthly insurance installment ) established with XXXX  XXXX. For the month of XXXX, I prepaid this amount on XX/XX/XXXX. This was in response to a false claim by the XXXX representative that a {$5.00} installment fee each month was avoidable by paying early. There evident policy is, in fact, that payments need to be scheduled prior to the date each bill is created ( i.e., 17 days prior to the due date ) but not that they must also be scheduled to pay in advance. 

The payment I made the day of XX/XX/XXXX posted to NFCU on XXXX. Subsequently, I contacted XXXX when the usual payment set for XX/XX/XXXX was still reflected on my " upcoming payments, '' without adjustment for the payment already being applied for the period beginning XX/XX/XXXX. They eventually recanted, giving acknowledgement that they falsely had represented future due dates as " upcoming payments. '' These could not be adjusted XXXX and, functionally, worked the same as a credit card statement with a Due Date that is fixed, irrespective of whether a cardholder may actually pay early ). They were implemented to obfuscate that a payment had, in fact, been scheduled XXXX now superfluous to the XXXX policy period ), and did need to be cancelled. The first written response I received was after that XX/XX/XXXX payment was submitted for processing. Hence, the following transactions did occur. 

XX/XX/XXXX, repeat payment was submitted by XXXX, shows " processing. '' In feedback, they repeatedly claimed this was intended to be applied to the policy period from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. 

Between XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, NFCU relays the scheduled ACH transaction against my account, which now has funds below the amount of that transaction to allow it to pull in duplicate. 

XX/XX/XXXX, NFCU assesses an insufficient funds fee XXXX {$29.00} XXXX which I am not alerted to until that morning of XX/XX/XXXX ( via e-mail ). 

Tuesday, XX/XX/XXXX, I have {$30.00} transferred to NFCU to repair the negative balance now on my checking account. 

XX/XX/XXXX, I call NFCU to clarify that this fee, which had not been listed with any explanation -- vendor, date, or type of transaction. ( Only the later date the fee was assessed shows on the statement. ). Per their account notice : " ... the item ( s ) listed in the table below was/were presented for payment. Sufficient funds were not available in your account to pay for this/these item ( s ) ; therefore, the item ( s ) was/were returned. Per the terms and conditions for your account, please be advised that when funds are not available to pay an item, a {$29.00} fee may be assessed for each returned item. A total of was deducted from your account on the next business day for the following item ( s ) : " Item Number ( ID ) " XXXX '' On the call, I make a clear argument that this transaction was submitted in error, upon misinformation and counsel of XXXX  to pay early, and that the request was for a payment obligation previously satisfied ; I also clearly state that I did not wish this transaction to have gone through, and had -- prior to XX/XX/XXXX -- contacted XXXX  on fear that ( as the website represented ) they would take an " upcoming payment '' that I could not cancel online. 

At this time, I was given no information that the fee -- per standard policy -- would be assessed, without any discretion, three times at intervals at or greater than two business days. Neither did I have actionable information that I needed to expect the transaction to be re-submitted, nor that it would have any consequence if I did not have the funds available for subsequent processing ( transfer out of my account to satisfy XXXX  ). Accordingly, I did not know there was a payment in any way active, and which I could request to stop. 

I called XXXX also XX/XX/XXXX and made an extended verbal grievance of the same, citing the phone calls and the lies the first representative furnished ( in direct opposition to statements on the website and in my e-mail correspondence from them on the matter. A supervisor recognized the patent misrepresentation of the payment terms which I had been furnished ( on the phone prior to my payment XX/XX/XXXX ), and offered to repair the {$5.00} increase in charge for the current month. She did not address the intent of XXXX to assess a {$20.00} fee for the second payment not processing, and -- significantly -- she also made no mention of the fact that they anticipated at least 3 business days ( 3 attempts ) before resolution of the XX/XX/XXXX payment, that only with failure thereupon would this fee be assessed. 

XX/XX/XXXX, NFCU again generates an e-mail, again assesses a fee without explanation substantially beyond the discrepancy within their notice that ( 1 ) the item, with the same ID " On XX/XX/XXXX '' ( posted XX/XX/XXXX ) appearing for the notice of XX/XX/XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX posting ) had not been " returned, '' but was held open ; ( 2 ) " a {$29.00} fee may be assessed for each returned item, '' where I had been charged again on that item which the notice identified as the same ; and ( 3 ) that I had, in fact, been charged twice rather than " A total of {$29.00}, '' as was a second time claimed. 

Without delay, I again called on XX/XX/XXXX, again raised the issues as at the previous call ( to NFCU ), and demanded a transparent explanation of why it was justified to take a second fee -- which is in violation of NFCU 's own terms and in defiance of the explanation of what was communicated to me in the referenced notices And also by telephone just two days before. Injury was not conceded, and remuneration or even a revision of the terms of the account agreement or the fee notice which were false were not received for consideration. I did learn that it was their design to charge me a third time, and I was offered a stop payment for that final processing attempt. Also, I at this time transferred funds to the excess amount needed ( after offsetting the negative balance ) in the event that a debit was again attempted. 

I also sent another message to NFCU today to signal " my object to file a complaint '' with this body, and the potential of obtaining legal representation, in consideration of their apparent violation of the law. 

A later conversation with XXXX yielded an offer to offset the returned-payment fee XXXX {$20.00} XXXX on the next payment due ; this adjustment has not been made as of this writing.

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