February 2020 Complaints Against USAA

Compiled from Public Data by FairShake

If you have an issue with USAA, you’re not alone.

The US government’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) collects complaints against financial companies.

In 2020, the CFPB received 1592 complaints against USAA. USAA ranked Number 27 among all financial companies for the most complaints.

Do you have a complaint against USAA?

Pursue Legal Help

FairShake helps thousands of people take legal action & get compensated…

Learn more about how to sue USAA

Complaint Details:

Date of Complaint: February 19, 2020


State: CA

Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-Product: General-purpose credit card or charge card

Issue: Problem with a purchase shown on your statement
Sub-Issue: Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card

Full Complaint:
While I was on a XXXX XXXX flight to visit my parents in XXXX, TX ( with my credit card on my person ), 3 fraudulent transactions were made at ” XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ” with my credit card in the amounts of XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, respectively. This was on XX/XX/XXXX. I received a call later that night from my hotel room alerting me to the fraud, and when I checked my statement, sure enough, there were 3 purchases that I definitely did not make on my statement. I called USAA, my credit card issuer, and alerted them that these charges were fraudulent. Through a long process of going back and forth with the credit card company ( USAA ), the company, repeatedly denied my fraud claim and subsequent disputes. Upon providing evidence that I was not present to make the fraudulent charges, USAA stated that : ” The XXXX determined that the Signature Visa chip card XXXX was presented in person at the time of the purchases ; therefore, authorizing the charges. In accordance with the USAA Credit Card Agreement, the primary cardholder is liable for any and all charges by joint account holders, authorized persons, or anyone allowed to use the account. Determining the identity of the person ( s ) who presented the card will not change the decision of liability. XXXX XXXX, upon receipt of your most recent submission to the CFPB, we conducted another review of the credit card transactions. We identified no activity indicative of theft or account takeover, and you have presented no new information that would warrant a change in our position. The decision to hold you liable for the credit card charges is upheld, and we respectfully deny your request to delete the charges from your account history or credit card balance. If you have additional questions regarding this matter, our staff remains available to assist you. ” Essentially, USAA said that determining that I was not the one who made the fraudulent charges will not change their decision that I am liable for them. I did not authorize anyone else to use my card and I have no joint account holders. As USAA knows, I am the only authorized user of my credit card.

I would like to know two things : * Why is it that ” Determining the identity of the person ( s ) who presented the card will not change the decision of liability ”? If someone other than me made the charges, it is fraud. Nobody else is authorized in any way to do business in my name and I do not give out my credit card. I certify that I did not authorize anybody else to use that credit card nor did I give mine to anybody else. In fact, as the attached signed statement points out, my card was on my person in Texas while the charge was made in XXXX XXXX.
* If neither I nor an authorized user / joint account holder of the card made a transaction, doesn’t the 0 fraud liability clause mean that I should not be held liable? There is nobody else authorized to use my credit card within USAA. Does USAA claim that I, the cardholder, somehow benefitted from this? If so, I would imagine that USAA has some evidence to back this up beyond not knowing how the fraud occurred. I would like to see this evidence if it exists. Please explain in detail how this denial complies with 1026.12 ( b ) ( 1 ) — the definition of unauthorized use, and 1026.12 ( b ) ( 2 ) — the conditions of liability of the Truth in Lending Act. It seems to me that USAA is legally required to resolve this fraud claim by reimbursing me for the fraud.

For reference, I am attaching the same evidence that I was not present to make the fraudulent charges as I have in previous communications.

Company response:

Response Type: Closed with explanation

FairShake accessed this complaint from the public archives of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). You can file your own complaint with the CFPB here.