Consumer complaint received 2026-07-03 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Checking account
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding repeated mishandling of fraud and unauthorized transaction claims by USAA Federal Savings Bank. My cases involve extortion, coercion, and incapacitation, yet USAA has consistently denied my claims solely on the basis that my PIN was used, without adequately investigating the surrounding facts or applying the proper legal standard for authorization under Regulation XXXX. Most recently, I was the victim of a serious incident in which I was drugged and then forced to transfer money to my USAA credit card and withdraw cash from an ATM to hand over to the perpetrator. At the time, I was not in a condition to provide legal consent, and the transactions were not voluntary. Transactions carried out under coercion or while a person is incapacitated are not automatically authorized simply because a PIN was used. This is not an isolated incident. I have experienced multiple cases involving coercion and extortion, and in each instance, USAA has denied my claims using the same rationale : that the use of my PIN proves the transactions were consensual and valid. That position is not supported by the XXXX guidance, which specifically warns that a bank can not assume a transaction was authorized merely because the customers card and PIN were used. USAA has not conducted the necessary research into any of my disputes. A reasonable investigation should consider factors such as the customers location at the time of the transaction, the pattern and location of account activity, police reports, security footage if available, and any evidence showing coercion, fraud, or incapacitation. Instead, USAA has relied on a single factthe use of my XXXX deny my claims. USAA has also failed to account for the legal implications of denying claims based solely on PIN usage, despite having been instructed in the past not to use that as the sole basis for denial. Under Regulation XXXX, the institution bears the burden of showing that the transaction was authorized, and it must conduct a good-faith, reasonable investigation of an error claim. I am requesting that the CFPB review XXXX handling of my fraud claims for compliance with Regulation XXXX and its error-resolution duties, require a proper investigation into my most recent case and prior similar incidents, and direct USAA to stop denying claims solely because a PIN was used without considering consent, coercion, or incapacity. I am also requesting appropriate remediation, including reimbursement for unauthorized transactions where warranted. I am prepared to provide supporting documentation, including transaction records, prior claim correspondence, and any relevant medical or police reports. [ treas ] XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX [ Updated for 2026 ]. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. In-Text Citations - Referencing Quick Guide- XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ). Published XXXX. [ libguides ] XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX.

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 non-monetary relief