The largest USAA class action lawsuit is Bulls v. USAA Federal Savings Bank, a $64.2 million settlement resolving allegations that USAA overcharged roughly 210,000 servicemembers on interest and fees in violation of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and related laws. USAA has also settled a $3.25 million data breach case and a $5 million Maryland late-fee case in the past two years, and it faces an ongoing class action over automated claims denials. A separate $114 million bad-faith verdict in Nevada is an individual case, not a class action, so most policyholders will not see money from it.
The $64.2 Million SCRA Overcharge Settlement
Bulls et al. v. USAA Federal Savings Bank et al., Case No. 5:21-cv-00488-BO in the Eastern District of North Carolina, alleged that USAA Savings Bank and USAA Federal Savings Bank overcharged military servicemembers on interest rates and fees during and after active duty. The suit cited the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), the Military Lending Act (MLA), the Truth in Lending Act, the Florida Uniformed Servicemembers Protection Act, and Nevada’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act, among other claims. The alleged conduct spanned March 2013 through March 2019 on SCRA claims, with MLA violations covering October 2016 through October 2018 and vehicle protection and debt protection overcharges reaching back as far as 2009.1USAA Bank Class Action. Bulls v. USAA Federal Savings Bank Settlement FAQ USAA denied all wrongdoing.
Who Is Covered
The class includes roughly 210,000 USAA customers who either received and deposited a remediation check from prior SCRA, MLA, vehicle protection, or debt protection remediations, or who were identified to receive such a check but never successfully cashed it.2ClassAction.org. Bulls et al. v. USAA Federal Savings Bank, Preliminary Approval Order Judge Terrence W. Boyle granted final approval on January 14, 2025.3Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. Bulls et al. v. USAA Federal Savings Bank et al.
How Payments Work
Class members did not need to file a claim. Payments were issued automatically from USAA’s records. Direct deposits for eligible account holders were scheduled around April 29, 2025. Digital payments through EpiqPay began with email notifications on May 6, 2025, and recipients had until August 4, 2025, to claim those funds. Where direct deposit failed or a digital payment could not be delivered, the administrator mailed checks.1USAA Bank Class Action. Bulls v. USAA Federal Savings Bank Settlement FAQ
Average payments were estimated to exceed $200. A second round is planned for class members whose first-round payment exceeded $250. That round will be funded by uncashed checks and interest earned on the settlement fund, allocated proportionally to first-round amounts. Its timing depends on the 180-day expiration window for uncashed first-round checks.1USAA Bank Class Action. Bulls v. USAA Federal Savings Bank Settlement FAQ
Questions go to the claims administrator, Epiq Class Action and Claims Solutions, at 1-888-378-7406 or info@USAABankClassAction.info.1USAA Bank Class Action. Bulls v. USAA Federal Savings Bank Settlement FAQ
The $3.25 Million Data Breach Settlement
USAA identified unauthorized third-party access to its insurance quotation platform on or around May 6, 2021. The breach compromised personal information of more than 22,000 policyholders and led to In re USAA Data Security Litigation, Case No. 7:21-cv-5813-VB in the Southern District of New York.4Bloomberg Law. Judge OKs USAA’s $3.25 Million Settlement in Data Breach Suit
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti granted final approval on May 21, 2025. Approximately 22,646 people were eligible, and the deadline to submit a settlement payment election was April 7, 2025. No traditional claim form was needed; the administrator, Angeion Group LLC, identified qualifying members from USAA’s records.5USAA Data Settlement. In re USAA Data Security Litigation Settlement FAQ Individual payments were projected at roughly $95 to $143, and distributions were underway by mid-2025.6MoneyPilot. USAA Data Breach Settlement
The $5 Million Maryland Late Fee Settlement
Black et al. v. USAA General Indemnity Company et al., Case No. 8:21-CV-01581-LKG, targeted USAA’s handling of insurance late fees in Maryland. A 2018 consumer complaint prompted a Maryland Insurance Administration investigation, which found that USAA had been collecting late fees on policies without proper authorization after it withdrew its fee plans in 2011. A 2020 MIA consent order concluded the removal had been “inadvertent,” fined USAA $67,500, and required refunds.7PropertyCasualty360. USAA Agrees to $5M Settlement in Late Fee Class Action
According to the lawsuit, USAA collected about $8.1 million in unauthorized late fees from roughly 127,000 Maryland policyholders between 2011 and 2019, refunded around $7.3 million in 2020, but kept the interest earned on those funds and never disclosed that the fees had been unauthorized.7PropertyCasualty360. USAA Agrees to $5M Settlement in Late Fee Class Action The class covers people who received a late fee refund under the MIA consent order but did not receive the interest collected on those fees.8ClassAction.org. $5M USAA Settlement Ends Class Action
The court granted final approval on April 28, 2026. Up to $2 million was allocated to attorneys’ fees and costs, leaving at least $3 million for the class. Individual payments range from about $5.04 to $274.90, with a median of $14.77. Current policyholders will see account credits within 30 days of the settlement’s effective date; former policyholders will receive checks by mail within 60 days. Funds unclaimed nine months after distribution go to the Wounded Warrior Project and Face the Fight as cy pres recipients.9Black v. USAA General Indemnity Company. Memorandum Opinion and Order on Final Approval
Pending Class Action: Automated Injury Claim Denials
Jennings et al. v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-06171 in the Western District of Washington, is still active. Two policyholders allege that USAA delegates its automobile injury claims processing to a third party, Auto Injury Solutions (a subsidiary of CCC Intelligent Solutions), which runs a “Medical Bill Audit” program that reduces or denies personal injury protection and medical payment claims without meaningful human review.10Repairer Driven News. Lawsuit Alleges USAA Uses Computer System to Arbitrarily Deny, Reduce Claims
Plaintiffs Caryn Jennings and Tricia Harder allege the system relies on an outdated Medicare-based database and that reviewing physicians never contact patients or providers. Jennings says she was denied $840 for a massage therapy claim in 2017 under the process. USAA denies the allegations and calls its use of the contractor “appropriate.”10Repairer Driven News. Lawsuit Alleges USAA Uses Computer System to Arbitrarily Deny, Reduce Claims The case has not been certified as a class action or settled.
A Class Action That Ended in USAA’s Favor
Coleman et al. v. United Services Automobile Association et al., Case No. 21-cv-217-RSH-KSC in the Southern District of California, alleged that USAA used “placement rules” to assign policyholders to different subsidiaries based on military rank. Commissioned officers and higher-ranking enlisted personnel were placed with United Services, which had lower approved rates, while enlisted members below pay grade E-6 were assigned to USAA General Indemnity Company, which charged more. Plaintiffs argued the practice violated California good-driver-discount provisions.11CaseMine. Coleman v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n
On January 9, 2025, Judge Robert S. Huie granted USAA’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the placement rules were permissible under a California Insurance Code provision that allows insurers to limit issuance to specific segments of military service members. The ruling ended the case in USAA’s favor, so no class payments will result.11CaseMine. Coleman v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n
The $114 Million Kuhn Verdict Is Not a Class Action
A Clark County, Nevada jury returned a $114 million verdict against USAA in early 2025 for bad-faith insurance practices. Timothy Kuhn was rear-ended in 2018. USAA initially found Kuhn not at fault, then intervened in his suit against the other driver and argued Kuhn was actually responsible. The insurer also disputed the severity of his head injury and held to a $10,000 offer for an extended period before paying the $250,000 policy limit on the eve of trial.12CVN. USAA Hit With $100M Punitive Bad Faith Verdict
The jury awarded $14 million in compensatory damages and $100 million in punitive damages. USAA said it “respectfully disagrees with the verdict” and was expected to consider an appeal.13Insurance Business Magazine. USAA Hit With $114 Million Decision Over Bad Faith Because this is a single-plaintiff case, other USAA policyholders are not entitled to any share of the verdict.
The Regulatory Backdrop
The SCRA overcharges behind the Bulls settlement did not surface in isolation. Federal regulators have penalized USAA repeatedly for compliance failures at the bank.
In January 2019, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ordered USAA Federal Savings Bank to pay about $12 million in restitution and a $3.5 million civil penalty over stop-payment and error-resolution failures under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, and for reopening nearly 17,000 closed consumer deposit accounts without authorization between 2011 and 2016, which produced roughly $269,000 in fees for more than 5,100 consumers.14Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. USAA Federal Savings Bank Enforcement Action
In October 2020, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency fined USAA $85 million for unsafe or unsound practices, citing violations of the Military Lending Act and the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which are the same laws at the center of the Bulls case.15OCC. OCC Assesses $85 Million Civil Money Penalty Against USAA Federal Savings Bank
In March 2022, FinCEN and the OCC imposed combined penalties of $140 million ($80 million and $60 million respectively) for willful failures in USAA’s anti-money-laundering program, including at least 3,873 suspicious activity reports filed late by an average of 226 days.16FinCEN. USAA Federal Savings Bank Consent Order
On December 18, 2024, the OCC issued a comprehensive cease-and-desist order that replaced the 2019 and 2022 orders because USAA had failed to comply with parts of both. The order restricts USAA from adding new products or expanding membership criteria without documenting risks and giving the OCC 90 days’ notice, and effective April 1, 2025, prohibits incentive-based compensation to covered individuals until the bank can show those payments account for adverse risk outcomes.17OCC. USAA Federal Savings Bank Consent Order AA-ENF-2024-96
If You Think You’re a Class Member
For the SCRA settlement, contact Epiq at 1-888-378-7406 or info@USAABankClassAction.info if you believe you were entitled to a payment but never received one, especially if a check was mailed and returned or a digital payment went unclaimed by August 4, 2025. For the Maryland late-fee settlement, current USAA policyholders should watch for an account credit and former policyholders should watch the mail. For the data breach settlement, the election deadline has passed; questions about a missed payment go to Angeion Group. None of these settlements required members to file a claim form, so if USAA had you on its list, the administrator was responsible for reaching you.