Citadel Federal Credit Union

From: Anthony H***Date: Wed, Apr 26, at 12:PMSubject: RE: Revdex.com Response ParkerTo: *** *** Cc: *** *** The contract that *** *** signed (copy attached) states that, for a repossessed vehicle to be redeemed, the loan must be paid in full. We tried to work with her to develop a solution that would allow her to redeem the vehicle for less than those requirements, but she was not able to meet the requirements . Tony H***Collection Manager###-###-#### Banking with one focus. You.CitadelBanking.com

A title was issued demonstrating the lien was released by CitadelIt is assumed the customer received the title as there has been no communication regarding the matter in last six monthsAs such, the consumer's desired resolution was accomplishedWe appreciate The Revdex.com bringing
this matter to our attention and allowing us to provide a responseRegards,Brian K*** Director of Consumer Lending

To whom it may concern:We have reviewed the account in questionThe account has been inactive since March Our disclosure states that a $monthly inactivity fee will apply if no activity for daysThe Customer was receiving an account statement electronically via Online Banking each
month.The Customer Contacted Citadel on 8/and six months of fees were waived as a courtesy; that is a total of $90.As an additional Courtesy, the additional fees, totaling $will be refunded today.Please contact me with any additional questions or concerns at ###-###-####.Regards,Liz F**Director of Payment Solutions

This car was repossessed on January 4, due to being payments or days past dueThe loan was due for October at the time of repossessionIn addition to being delinquent on the car loan, *** *** also defaulted on her credit card which was payments or days past dueThe card was
charged off On December 29, for more than months of nonpayment*** ***'s payment on November 26, to the car loan satisfied the September payment and left her due for October 21, We made multiple efforts to contact *** *** to promptly make her past due payments to avoid repossession*** *** failed to respond to our efforts; subsequently the vehicle was placed out for repossession on December 28, 2016.The auto loan agreement calls for the entire balance to be paid in full in the event of defaultIn an effort to help our members redeem their vehicles without having to pay off the loan in full, we ask for months of financial informationThe financials include months of pay stubs and months of bank statementsDuring this process, we analyze their income and expenses to determine why they are in default and look for opportunities to allow them to redeem for just the past due payments and fees, instead of the entire loan balanceAlthough *** *** had several monthly expenses that exceeded her income, we were still willing to allow her to redeem her vehicle if she was able to pay all of her loans Current and set up automatic payments to ensure timely payments going forward.*** *** was notable to meet all of the requirements needed to redeem her unitConsequently, the unit was sold on February 23,

This car was repossessed on March 9th, due to being payments or days past dueThe loan is currently past due for December, January and FebruaryThe loan is behind due to a failure to increase monthly payments to cover the forced placed insurance policy that was added to the loan to
protect the collateralThe payment amount increased because we had to pay for and add insurance coverage to your loan (twice), to cover a lapse in your own coverage, from September 23rd through September 23rd and from September 23rd through October 26th You were sent notices regarding the need for proof of insurance on 10/12/16, 11/9/16, 9/27/17, and 10/25/You were sent notices regarding your increased payment, due to the lack of insurance coverage, on 1/25/and 11/22/The increased payment amount also appeared on every monthly billing notice since 1/25/Prior to our repossession of the vehicle, we called, emailed, and wrote you on numerous occasions, for monthsThe contract stipulates payment in full in the event the vehicle is repossessedHowever, our agents told you that you could redeem the vehicle (after you sent in your proof of income) by catching up the past due payments, and paying the repossession feesThat option still remainsAt no time during your conversations with any of our agents was your race discussed, either with you, or regarding youOur agent also told you that you could have your payments reduced if you did have your own insurance coverage for the periods noted aboveThat option, also, still remainsYou will need to provide proof of adequate coverageThis request was made on each of the insurance notices I referenced abovePlease contact our office at ###-###-#### to resolve this today

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
*** ***

Thank you for forwarding Mr***'s rejection to our response regarding the title to his automobile.Our Director of Consumer Lending, Brian K***, confirmed that Citadel released the lien on the automobile title on July 3, As this was an electronic title held by Pennsylvania, Citadel Communicated with PennDOT that the lien was released and requested that a paper title be sent to the memberPennDOT shows that the title was mailed to Mr*** on July 9, 2015, to a North Carolina addressPlease note the address, to which the title was sent, does not match the address on Mr***'s current complaint.Since Citadel released its lien, PennDOT will no longer allow Citadel to request information on the title, Since we no longer have rights to the sameIn an effort to assist Mr***, Citadel will mail him a PennDOT application for a duplicate title and a check for $51.00, representing the duplicate title feeHe may use the application and the funds to request a duplicate copy of the title from the StateI would ask that Mr*** contact MrK*** to coordinate the mailing and to confirm the address, so that no further correspondence is lostMrK*** can be reached at *** or ###-###-####, ext6144.We appreciate The Revdex.com bringing this matter to our attention and allowing us to assist Mr*** in finally resolving this issue.Sincerely,Mitchel BK*** Chief Risk Officer

February 5, 2016Dear *** ***,Citadel Federal Credit Union reviewed the complaint identified as #***.Citadel provided the customer a simple interest loan on October 10, towards the purchase of a used automobile, Per the terms of the contract, the total amount of payments would equal
approximately $15,125,under the assumption the monthly payments were made promptly on each due dateUpon receipt of a payment, Citadel applies the monies toward the interest that had accrued since previous payment, and then the monies cover any accrued late fees with remaining monies applied to principalThe customer made payments to date with a payment extension in December which moved a monthly payment to the end of the loan, Considering a payment of approximately $per month, the customer paid approximately $7,over the paymentsIf these payments were made promptly on the scheduled due date, the remaining balance would be approximately $7,142.38.As the customer noted in her complaint, she had "struggles with employment"These struggles resulted in inconsistent payment history with of the payments made past the due dateNine of the payments were made between days to days past the due date, While another payments were made between day and days past the due dateAdditional interest accrued as the result of the additional elapsed time between paymentsAlso, this interest may be greater as a result of the higher principal balance in the beginning of the loan, In addition to the inconsistent payment history, Citadel provided the customer the ability to move the December payment to the end of the loan.As of this date, the pay-off amount on the loan is approximately $8,011.04, approximately $higher than scheduled amount of $7,The difference between the actual and scheduled is additional interest accrued due to the inconsistent payment history on instances and the rescheduling of a payment to the end of the loan.We appreciate The Revdex.com bringing this matter to our attention and allowing us to provide a response,Regards,Brian K.Director of Consumer Lending

March 22, 2016Dear *** ***:This letter is in response to *** ***'s complaint filed with the Revdex.com on April 2, 2015.As described in *** ***'s complaint, of inactivity fees were reversed by Citadel on March 20, *** ***'s checking account
accumulated a total of inactivity fees during the life of the checking accountIt is also important to note that these inactivity fees were not consecutive, due to a transaction being conducted in Citadel's Chester Springs' Office on April 5", 2014. *** *** opened the Free Checking account on March 26, 2013, and took advantage of the promotional offer Citadel was advertising at the time and received a $gift cardAs stated in Citadel's disclosures, Free Checking Accounts will receive a $monthly inactivity fee if there is no activity for days on the checking accountThe member had notperformed any activity on the account, which resulted in a $monthly inactivity fee.When *** ***'s account relationship was initially established with Citadel on July 1, 2012, her account was set up to receive electronic statements, but no email address was listed on the accountIt is the member's responsibility to ensure that a valid email address is on file and to access/monitor his/her account via online banking to view account statements on a monthly basis.The account was reviewed on March 20, by myself and Charles R***, Market Manager at Citadel's Chester Springs officeMrR*** and I agreed to reverse of the fees that were charged to *** ***'s account.On April 1, 2015, *** *** closed her checking and savings accounts at Citadel, terminating her membership with the credit union,If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,Jackie M.Director of Retail Delivery, Central Division

in May of 2015, the member had a negative account balance of $1,The negative balance included items paid out as part of our Courtesy Pay Overdraft service, as well as Courtesy Payfees andNSF fess that were assessed against the accountAs the member requested, we did opt her out of .Courtesy
Pay, however, there were various recurring ACH debits that the member did not cancel, which accounted for many of the NSF fees that were posted to the account- • -We attempted to negotiate a repayment arrangement with Ms***We waived $in fees,after an additional $in fees had been previously waived.Ms*** agreed to send our Collections Manager a written breakdown of charges and additional fees that she felt should be reversed from her account, along with an expla nation of whyMs*** never followed through, other than to say that she was not going to pay anything additional.We continued to attempt to contact the member and work with her, until the account was charged-off in September .if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me''Very truly yours,Mitchel BK*** Chief Risk Officer

This is in response to a complaint filed with the Revdex.com by *** *** regarding the repossession of her vehicle.This customer was days late on their auto loanThe customer's bankruptcy protection filing was discharged in JanuaryAfter the discharge of the Bankruptcy
filing, Citadel proceeded with its standard repossession procedures.Upon receiving an email complaint, a member of Citadel's Collections team attempted to contact the customer by phoneThe customer called back and the name and number of the repossession company was provided so that the customer would be able to retrieve their personal belongings.Sincerely,Anthony HCollections Manager

This is in response to a complaint filed with the Revdex.com by *** *** regarding the addition of force placed collateral protection insurance to a vehicle loan.On July 6, 2016, Citadel received notification that the insurance policy was cancelled effective June 18, A
request for updated insurance information was mailed to you on that date (attached)After approximately days, Citadel mailed you a second request for insurance information on August 3, (attached)We did not receive a response from the two letters or any notification from your new insurance providerAS Such, we exercised our right to obtain insurance to cover loss or damage to the vehicle as agreed upon the retail financing agreement/contractCitadel notified you of the purchase of the insurance on August 26, (attached).Citadel was notified on February 2, of your current insurance providerAfter some correspondence with your insurance provider and yourself, Citadel was able to confirm the coverages, coverage dates, and Citadel was listed as the lienholderThe insurance amount was refunded in two installments; $on February 15, and $1,on March 1, after elements of insurance coverage were confirmedOnce both refunds were processed, your payment was adjusted back to the previous payment amount and you are currently due for March 21, 2017.In your correspondence you stated your desired resolution was for the derogatory credit marks to be removedA request has been submitted to the credit bureaus to remove four recent derogatory marksIn general, the Credit bureaus may take up to days to process our request; however, we have requested an expedited update in the next ten business daysWe are glad that we were able to resolve this matter to your satisfaction.Sincerely,Brian K Director of Consumer Lending

Tell us why here...We were able to set up arrangements with the member to resolve this complaint that were suitable for  both the member and Citadel. Communication is key to resolving complaints of this nature and Citadel will continue to be flexible to reach a resolution.

April 10,
2018Dear [redacted], This letter is in response to a complaint you
recently filed with the Revdex.com (Revdex.com). At Citadel, we take our
members’ fraud and security extremely seriously. Our Fraud Team handles these
types of reports individually and thoroughly to make the most...

sound decision
possible. We have reviewed your complaint as well as records we have on file in
regards to your account.  The following information is intended to address
the concerns raised in your recent complaint.  In the complaint, you
allege that your card was stolen on or before March 7th and that
fraudulent charges had inappropriately posted to your account.  These
charges were then reported to the credit union as fraud and you sought to have
the funds returned to you.  When your initial report and these
transactions were reviewed by the organization, your claim was denied due to a
handful of factors.      As a result of your complaint, we
requested the Fraud Team revisit your claim to ensure their review was
comprehensive and the decision reached was appropriate based on the merits of
the report and your recent complaint.  Any review would include an
evaluation of the initial file, your Revdex.com complaint, as well as include any new
information that we may have obtained from the merchants involved.  As
noted, you reported that your card was stolen on or before 3/7/18 while
traveling in New York City.  Subsequently, authorizations from [redacted] posted to the account on 3/7 and 3/10 which you reported as fraud. 
Additional activity that occurred on 3/11 (a merchant purchase and ATM
withdraw) in New York City was also disputed.  Lastly, you included a
[redacted] charge on 3/10 that was listed as fraud.  No other
transactions that had posted to the account were reported as fraud.   In reviewing your transaction history, we
see that two legitimate transactions occurred on 3/8 and 3/9.  These
incidents involved the card being presented to a merchant and an ATM at the
time of each transaction. Entries for a purchase at [redacted] and a
withdrawal at a Gilbertsville ATM were not reported as fraud and both occurred
close to your residence on file.   Further, two New York based
transactions on 3/11 also involved the card being presented and a PIN
used.  Both of these transactions were PIN-based entries for which no PIN
failures occurred.  As for the [redacted] charge, we observed a
similar charge posting to your account on 2/20 (undisputed) which suggests that
you have an ongoing relationship with that particular merchant.   Since the reported transactions involved
presentation of the actual card AND use of the account PIN, undisputed
transactions occurred with that specific card and PIN after it was reported
stolen, and a prior existing relationship with a merchant, your initial claim
was denied.  Our follow-up review confirmed the team’s initial
findings.  The card was repeatedly used by you after it was reported
stolen and PIN-based transactions were processed with zero failures, meaning
that the party using the card had full knowledge of the PIN.  Based on
these facts, we are unable to render a decision which reverses the team’s
initial findings at this time.   Accordingly, there will be no further
actions taken in regards to this matter by the credit union.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:We specifialy asked in the branch whether owning a previous account more than 12 months ago and receiving the bonus would disqualify us and were told that we were eligible we then spent the next 7 months fulfilling all the requirements 
Regards,
[redacted]

[redacted]...

[redacted]
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  The company has called and set up arrangement with me.
Regards,
[redacted]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

I have sent them proof several times.   The coverage at the times mentioned my deductables were set to high and citadel was not listed as my lien holder which is why they would not accept what I sent them and I had to change it.    Also that was all paid in full to them when them repoed my car in 2016.   I'm not sure why now in2017 they are trying to recharge me again for the same thing from 2015

Dear [redacted], This letter is in response to a complaint you filed with the Revdex.com pertaining to your Credit Card Payment and an Auto Loan application. I apologize for the inconvenience involving your credit card due date not being advanced with your payment on May 31st.  We...

have since adjusted your due date and your new payment date is July 25th.  This initially occurred as a result of the billing cycle on your [redacted].  Unfortunately, payments received in one month do not advance the due date for the following month. Citadel is in receipt of an auto loan application in your name that we received from [redacted].  This application has been approved and returned to [redacted] for processing.  If you no longer wish to proceed with this application you would need to contact [redacted] to ensure that they do not execute the contract.  If the contract has been executed on your behalf through [redacted], you would need to refinance the loan at another financial institution, thus paying off the loan at Citadel.      Please feel free to contact us at ###-###-#### if you would like to discuss this in greater detail or have any additional questions. Sincerely, Steve M[redacted]

thank you for reviewing and facilitating my complaint with Citadel Federal Credit Union. realize I did not reply to Mr. Mitchell B. K[redacted]'s letter dated 4/20/2016, and because of this my complaint has been closed by the Revdex.com. At this point there is clearly no reason to take this forward, but I do feel I need to address the inaccuracy in the letter (aside from referring to me as Ms. [redacted]). While I was contacted by Citadel on April 19, 2016 as the letter states, I did not tell them that the matter had been resolved with my landlord. That is a complete fabrication on their part. Nor did "indicate" that I wished to close my Citadel accounts, I had already done that. There was no offer to help me in any way, since I was no longer a customer.My concern is, this type of letter seeks to gloss over the facts and suggest that Citadel did their due diligence to help me resolve their error, which is false. There is also no mention of the fact that when lattempted to deposit a check to cover their error they deposited it in the check Writer's account. On the receipt for that transaction I was given intimate details about that other member's account. This breach of privacy and security is above all the reason why I closed my accounts immediately, and will never set foot in a Citadel branch again.Do with this whatever you see fit, but do not mistake my previous inaction for an indication that this dispute has been resolved.Warmly,[redacted]