ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A member of a New Jersey credit union has filed a multimillion dollar lawsuit against NCUA claiming the credit union regulator failed to enforce anti-discrimination and other consumer laws in her bid for a loan.
In a suit filed in federal court, Toni Clark, a member of Healthcare Employees FCU, claims that NCUA was negligent in its investigation of her complaint and "dishonest in their findings," and is asking for $6 million in damages.
Filing of the suit comes as NCUA is trying to fend off efforts by Congress to bring credit unions and other financial services providers under a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency.
Clark claims she was denied a loan of $2,000 and an upgrade on her Visa card based on her race, even though she was current on all loan payments.
After being prompted by NCUA, the Healthcare Employees FCU's supervisory committee recommended that the management approve the loan application, remove the security deposit on her credit card and formally apologize to Clark, as well as give her a 0.25% discount on the interest rate for the loan.
NCUA sent a letter to Clark explaining their recommendation but sent it to the wrong address, so she never received it. After realizing their mistake, NCUA sent her another letter explaining they did not believe any violation of law had occurred and noted that the credit union had ultimately agreed to approve the loan and remove the security deposit on her credit card.
But the dispute, claims Clark, caused her stress and anger. "NCUA has caused me pain and suffering, mental anguish, physical and emotional stress due to their negligence by not doing their job," the suit alleges.
"Economically, I needed the loan to go to school so my academic progress was damaged because I was a single mother making very little money," said Clark in the suit.
An NCUA spokesman said the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
John Dawidowski, president of Healthcare Employees FCU, acknowledged the Clark complaint but also declined to comment.
A hearing on NCUA's motion to dismiss the case has been scheduled for Aug. 14.
