State Department Federal 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 Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
The bank manager has refused to provide a declaration statement that the package with personal data  was lost or stolen .  Secondly, the branch manager is aware the package was sent certified insured. Lastly, a support supervisor confirmed that the package was received and forward to the branch manager.
Regards,
[redacted]

Re: Complaint ID: [redacted]Complainant; [redacted]:We have concluded our research into the referenced Complaint and offer the following in the response to, [redacted]' stated concerns:[redacted]' history with us began in April of 2012 when she opened a savings account at our Ft. McNair branch on 4/4/2012. On 4/8/2015, [redacted] applied for a secured credit card and one was issued to her on 4/9/2015. The $250 credit limit was secured by placing a hold on existing funds in her savings account.In her complaint, [redacted] has indicated that her attempt to process a credit card transaction in July, 2015 was declined and upon contacting us to determine why, found that her card was blocked and no explanation was provided to her, She then claims she received an email from us regarding a negative savings account balance of $608.47 and an outstanding balance of $2,286.70 on her credit card, but "had no knowledge” of these balances. She further claims that she sent us a fraud claim and multiple disputes which we “ignored”.Our records reflect our having frozen [redacted]' credit card on July 17, 2015. This action was taken, due to a repeated history throughout June and early july of payments being initiated from her savings account, then said payments being returned for non-sufficient funds (NSF) and the subsequent charge of NSF fees. More than 30 such credit card payments were initiated via our online banking service during June and early July.While [redacted] claims to have no knowledge of this activity, our records also reflect that she was provided with monthly statements for both her credit card and savings accounts; statements provided for June and July would have reflected the numerous payments, payment reversals, and NSF fees applied.Following our having blocked the credit card, our records reflect repeated contact attempts,commencing on July 17th, with subsequent contact attempts made on 7/24, 7/27, culminating in our Collections department sending a formal letter to her on 7/28, two additional attempts to contact her were made on 7/29 and 8/3, with a second fetter sent by our Collections department on 8/5. Following an additional email and phone call attempt on 8/7, [redacted] finally emailed us on 8/12 and we responded of that date, On 8/14/15, [redacted] indicated she anticipated receipt of a large income tax return which would resolve the matter. She had also engaged in a conversation with our Collections team regarding a payment plan.While [redacted] did complete a “Claim of Fraud and Forgery” form on 8/25/2015, claiming she did not authorize any payments to her credit card after the date of 5/30/15, said claim was determined to be unfounded once we determined that the payments had been originated via our online banking service, One must first use their unique credentials to log in to their online account and then separately access their credit card which must be pre-registered for payment origination. At no time, did [redacted] indicate that her online barking access had been compromised, leaving the logical assumption that [redacted] had logged into her SDFCU account, accessed her credit card, then initiated the payments from her savings account.In conclusion, we believe that the foregoing information serves to substantiate the actions taken by State Department Federal Credit Union relative to our handling of [redacted]' account and that no "billing adjustment” is due her, We have been in the business of providing financial services to our global membership for over 80 years and pride ourselves on our integrity and commitment to member service.Sincerely,Karen M., BS, MA, CIP Manager, Support ServicesOn behalf of State Department Federal Credit UnionCC: [redacted]

Re: Complaint ID: [redacted]Complainant; [redacted]:We have concluded our research into the referenced Complaint and offer the following in the response to, [redacted]' stated concerns:[redacted]' history with us began in April of 2012 when she opened a savings account at our Ft. McNair branch on 4/4/2012. On 4/8/2015, [redacted] applied for a secured credit card and one was issued to her on 4/9/2015. The $250 credit limit was secured by placing a hold on existing funds in her savings account.
In her complaint, [redacted] has indicated that her attempt to process a credit card transaction in July, 2015 was declined and upon contacting us to determine why, found that her card was blocked and no explanation was provided to her, She then claims she received an email from us regarding a negative savings account balance of $608.47 and an outstanding balance of $2,286.70 on her credit card, but "had no knowledge” of these balances. She further claims that she sent us a fraud claim and multiple disputes which we “ignored”.
Our records reflect our having frozen [redacted]' credit card on July 17, 2015. This action was taken, due to a repeated history throughout June and early july of payments being initiated from her savings account, then said payments being returned for non-sufficient funds (NSF) and the subsequent charge of NSF fees. More than 30 such credit card payments were initiated via our online banking service during June and early July.
While [redacted] claims to have no knowledge of this activity, our records also reflect that she was provided with monthly statements for both her credit card and savings accounts; statements provided for June and July would have reflected the numerous payments, payment reversals, and NSF fees applied.
Following our having blocked the credit card, our records reflect repeated contact attempts,commencing on July 17th, with subsequent contact attempts made on 7/24, 7/27, culminating in our Collections department sending a formal letter to her on 7/28, two additional attempts to contact her were made on 7/29 and 8/3, with a second fetter sent by our Collections department on 8/5. Following an additional email and phone call attempt on 8/7, [redacted] finally emailed us on 8/12 and we responded of that date, On 8/14/15, [redacted] indicated she anticipated receipt of a large income tax return which would resolve the matter. She had also engaged in a conversation with our Collections team regarding a payment plan.
While [redacted] did complete a “Claim of Fraud and Forgery” form on 8/25/2015, claiming she did not authorize any payments to her credit card after the date of 5/30/15, said claim was determined to be unfounded once we determined that the payments had been originated via our online banking service, One must first use their unique credentials to log in to their online account and then separately access their credit card which must be pre-registered for payment origination. At no time, did [redacted] indicate that her online barking access had been compromised, leaving the logical assumption that [redacted] had logged into her SDFCU account, accessed her credit card, then initiated the payments from her savings account.
In conclusion, we believe that the foregoing information serves to substantiate the actions taken by State Department Federal Credit Union relative to our handling of [redacted]' account and that no "billing adjustment” is due her, We have been in the business of providing financial services to our global membership for over 80 years and pride ourselves on our integrity and commitment to member service.
Sincerely,
Karen M., BS, MA, CIP Manager, Support Services
On behalf of State Department Federal Credit Union
CC: [redacted]

July 22, 2014[redacted]:As follow-up to my previous communication to you, dated July 16, we have concluded our research of the referenced complaint and offer the following in response:In researching what transpired regarding our interactions with [redacted] beginning in early Apríl, 2013, we find that our records differ greatly from several [redacted]ments [redacted] has made in hercomplaint,1. [redacted] claims she was not assisted by our branch staff when reporting her check card stolen, She further claims she left the branch, called our call center, and received a new card in the mail. These [redacted]ments are contradicted by her account history which reflects that a new [redacted] check card was instant-issued to [redacted] on April 3, 2013 by an employee at our [redacted] branch location.2. [redacted] claims that she reported fraudulent purchases had been made following her card having been stolen. While her account history does reflect debits from her checking account for "[redacted]" on 4/3/13, our Loss Prevention, department has no record of receiving a formal claim of Fraud form or Dispute form from [redacted] regarding these debits.
3. [redacted] claims that after receiving her new card in April, 2013, she didn't think twice" her account until earlier this year when she received a [redacted]ment indicating there was no money in the account. Our records reflect account [redacted]ments were mailed to her [redacted] address an a monthly basis, so she would have seen her balance information every month subsequent to April, 2013. We have no record of her contacting us regarding her balances until recently when she went to our [redacted] branch ask about her account.[redacted] claims that she was told during her recent visit to our [redacted] branch that her account had been closed. Upon asking how that was possible, she claims a branch employee told her that the previous year, her account had been emptied at the time of the robbery, causing it to go into inactive Status, and then subsequently closed. Our current process is to status accounts as inactive" ifthere has been no transactional activity for a period of one year. The balance in an account is irrelevant to the account being Statused as inactive; the criteria is Spiely based upon account activity. Our records that there had been no activity on [redacted]' account since the 4/3/13 [redacted] debits, so the account was statused as inactive in May of this year. The first monthly inactive fee charged on 4/3/14 depleted the balance, resulting in closure of the account.4. [redacted] claims she received no response to an email sent the manager of our [redacted] Branch. Jesse B[redacted], the branch manager, has produced an email trail between himself and [redacted], dated 6/9/14, wherein they agreed to meet to discuss her issues. That meeting was scheduled for June 12th at 9:00am, per that email trail.
In conclusion, we did not steal" [redacted]' money, nor did we fail to assist her when she reported her stolen debit card to us. State Department Federal Credit Union has been in existence for over 75 years and we pride ourselves on the level of personal service we provide to our members, On the rare occasion when members expectations are not met, we also pride ourselves on doing what make it right. For this reason, we are willing to reimburse [redacted] for the $154 she has requested, as the original transactions she claims were fraud were not typical, given her checking account history. A check for $154.00 has been issued and enclosed in the copy of this letter mailed to [redacted] at her home address.Sincerely,Karen *. M[redacted], BS, MA, CIPManager, Branch ServicesOn behalf of State Department Federal 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 Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Let's review the information from the post office on this certified- insured  package.  The branch manager should be aware of who has the check and my personal data from the applications from both department's (member services and loan department).  If she can't find them them then we will need to proceed with other options to protect my identity.   Again, a firm and final resolution will need to reached to put my mind at ease.   If you have any questions please have the manager contact me by phone.
Regards,
[redacted]

I am responding to your request of April 21, 2015 received on April 24, 2015 addressed to [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] is on extended leave due to a family emergency. font-size: 11px;">We have been in contact with Mr. [redacted] many times regarding a package he sent us. We know wereceived a package from him on 2/11/2015. We are unable to locate the package and are unable toconfirmthe contents ofthe package. To do that, we have requested Mr. [redacted] provide us a copy ofthe cancelled check he claims was part of the package. Over the past several months we have askedfor this evidence and have yet to receive it. This is the same response we provided to you in your casenumber [redacted] sent by fax to your attention on March 18, 2015.We will provide Mr. [redacted] acknowledgment of a package, tracking number 95[redacted]received 2/11/2015. We cannot confirm the package contents. If we need a form to do that, he has yetto provide it to us.Sincerely,Joan P[redacted]Managing Director of Operational Support ServicesState Department Federal Credit Union

October 27, 2015
This to acknowledge that I received the referenced complaint on October 29, 2015 and your letter indicates a written response is expected "within 10 days”.Please note that we anticipate having the research completed and a response of our findings to you by November...

20, 2015,Sincerely,
Karen M,
BS, MA, ClP Manager, Support Services

Review: I have been a member of this establishment and faithful for over 25 years without payment problems I had two a/c#[redacted], $807.88 and a/c#[redacted] credit card $5000 and I had a good paying history. well I fell into a financial bind in 2006, they illegally took money from my savings and checking accounts and paid my wife's bills without my permission or knowledge, when I ask for explanations non was giving. Now this is on my credit report and I have judgements against me without resolve. I would like a day in court to resolve these money matters and a chance to clear my credit and get my life back on track.Desired Settlement: A chance to clear up both accounts through a settlement and for the SDFCU to show legal documents signed giving them permission by me to take money from my saving and checking accounts to pay my wife's bills when we and separate accounts. And if anything was done illegal by the State Department Federal Credit Union I want my bill and credit cleared. I did not give permission for them to take money from any of my accounts.

Review: I've attempted to open an account with SDFCU five times now - each time declined because the institution was unable to verify my identity electronically. The first time this was due to a frozen credit report - which I immediately unfroze. Four subsequent attempts have all been declined for an inability to verify my identity. I've subsequently checked my own credit report, and at no time did SDFCU attempt to access it - meaning they made no actual attempt to verify my identity. Every time I have called to explain this, I have received responses ranging from polite to condescending, and I have never once been allowed to speak to someone who can rectify this situation.

I have offered multiple times to submit any verification documents that they may need, but the only option I have been given is to go in person to a branch, which is not reasonable given that I live 1500 miles away from the nearest branch.

I contacted SDFCU on 7/12, 7/13, 7/16, 7/17, 7/18, 7/22, 7/23, and 8/4Desired Settlement: I would like SDFCU to initiate a soft-pull of my credit in order to verify my identity in order to open an account, or would like them to accept my option of sending documents to verify me.

Business

Response:

August 25, 2014Dear [redacted];I have received the referenced complaint (your letter dated August 7, 2014), Having researched our handling of [redacted]'s applications, we offer the following in response:Membership in State Department Federal Credit Union is approved for those applicants who meet specific requirements. Said requirements have been established as either Board approved (such as eligibility) or as required by our regulators (such as the need to verify an applicant's identity).Our online application process is constructed so that information input by the applicant serves to both verify and authenticate that individual. The information entered generates a "soft" credit inquiry of the data base housed by [redacted] which is then evaluated as follows:• The name, address, date of birth and social security number entered by the applicant are verified against what the [redacted] data base has on file for that person. This verification Component also includes a check against the US Postal Service's data base to determine if the address is a residential address. This “matching" (verification) component will result in a numerical score; the higher the score, the greater the likelihood that the information input into the application is valid.• The soft credit inquiry will also result in the generation of several multiple choice questions for the applicant to answer, said questions being based upon the information contained in the credit history. The responses to these questions serve to authenticate that the person who is answering them is who he says he is, and also results in a numerical score, The higher the score, the greater the likelihood that it is the real person, responding to the questions.The combined score that results from the verification and authentication components determineswhether an application is accepted (and membership extended) or denied (membership unable to be extended).In [redacted]'s situation, we received his first application on 7/12/14, His application did not automatically process through to completion, but immediately moved into a "referred” status for a staff member to review. Upon review, the application reflected that the verification and authentication aspects of the process failed to run because the [redacted] information returned with a “security freeze” response.Because the presence of the security freeze prevented the input data from being verified and the applicant was also not presented with the questions to authenticate him, our procedure in such cases is to decline the application and inform the applicant of the decline. At that time, we also suggest the applicant re-apply once the security freeze has been lifted from their credit file, or to apply in person at one of our branches. [redacted]'s application comments reflect that he was informed of this information. The four (4) subsequent applications submitted by [redacted] during the following 3 weeks were all denied for the same reason and all reflect similar comments.I am unable to determine if [redacted] was specifically informed of his need to contact [redacted] directly regarding the security freeze. For those applicants wishing to re-apply, we typically advise waiting a period of 30 days from the time [redacted] confirms a security freeze has been lifted, because the reporting of credit bureau information is typically done on 30 day cycles, so that length of time may be needed in order for the lifting of a security freeze to be validated by software applications used for automated processing.In conclusion, State Department Federal Credit Union does not arbitrarily deny membership, but rather, does so only when our application process has not resulted in the membership requirements being met. All applicants are evaluated against the criteria of eligibility and passing the identity verification and authentication components. We regret [redacted]'s application experience did not have the desired outcome of our being able to extend membership to him.Sincerely,Karen MManager, Branch Services

Review: My name is [redacted] and my spouse name [redacted] had her own account and credit card with the credit union. I had an checking and saving account that they used to pay her bill with out my permission. I asked if it was legal and was told that they could not do that but SDFCU did it several times with saving and checking. I spoke to the lawyer for the credit union and she stated that they would not take money from my account uless we had a joint account. well I do not and never had a joint account these actions caused me a hardship and my bill doubled. I want to clear this up off my records. SDFCU had no right to take my money when my accounts were in good standdings. And pay another person bills without my consent or knowledge.

ACCT#[redacted]Desired Settlement: Clearing my name and be put back in good standings, with the creditors and the SDFCU. clearing all debts and interest from this intfraction.

Business

Response:

October 17, 2013

**. [redacted]:

I have received the referenced complaint and am responding with a copy of the letter I faxed to you on April 3rd, 2013 in response to the same complaint we received on March 12th, 2013; a hard copy was also mailed to you.

I am also forwarding a copy of that letter to **. [redacted], under the assumption he may not have been provided with the results of our research conducted regarding his original complaint.

Our position regarding this matter remains unchanged. **. [redacted]'s claim that he "does not and never had a joint account" are patently untrue, as our original research determined [redacted] was a joint owner on his savings account in 2006. At her request, she was removed from the

account on 1/16/2007. **. [redacted] also claims we "had no right to take money.....and pay another person's bills without {his knowledge]". This claim is similarly untrue, as our original research shows he was informed of our right to offset funds from his jointly held account to meet his wife's loan obligation on 12/4/2006, when he came into our [redacted] Branch to withdraw funds from his savings account.

Again, based upon our original investigation into his claims, we maintain that **. [redacted]'s complaint is without merit.

We do note, however, that **. [redacted] contacted us on 9/23/13 and spoke with the Assistant Manager of our Member Solutions department. We confirmed that a judgment had been entered against him, and reiterated that we remained willing to enter into an amicable payment plan. **. [redacted] agreed to complete the paperwork required to begin the process of repaying the balance due on the account. To date, **. [redacted] has not followed through with initiating repayment.

Sincerely,