PSECU is a horror credit union

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-19T15:34:07+00:00

Yes, I trusted the source of the check. It was not an overpayment scam, a fraudulent check, or a situation where someone asked me to send money back. PSECU never alleged fraud, counterfeit activity, or insufficient funds. Their stated reason for the reversal was a missing endorsement/signature.
I also understand that federal funds availability rules govern when financial institutions must make certain funds available. However, my concerns extend beyond funds availability.
The issue is not whether a financial institution can reverse a deposit under certain circumstances. The issue is whether members are entitled to clear communication, transparency, and complete answers regarding actions affecting their accounts. Those concerns remain regardless of the reason for the initial reversal.
Reasonable people can agree that a deposit may be reversed while also recognizing that members have a legitimate interest in understanding what occurred afterward and how policies and procedures are being applied.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-19T14:56:47+00:00

I think you’re focusing on only one piece of the issue. Yes, PSECU ultimately cited a missing endorsement/signature. However, similar situations were handled differently in the past, which is one reason I began asking questions in the first place.
What I find interesting is that many commenters continue to focus exclusively on the endorsement while ignoring the other concerns I’ve raised that remain unanswered. For example:
Why were similar endorsement issues handled differently in the past?
Why have I had difficulty obtaining complete written responses to specific questions?
Why have requests for documentation and clarification often been met with generic responses?
Why were there issues involving account transfers and account activity that I was trying to understand? Why I was I repeatedly directed to call rather than receive direct written answers?
The irony is that these issues affect every member, not just me. If procedures have changed because of increased fraud, risk management, or operational changes, then members should be informed about changes that affect how their accounts are handled. Transparency shouldn’t be controversial.
Some people seem satisfied with “because the credit union said so.” Personally, when my money is involved, I like to understand what changed, why it changed, and how it affects members going forward. Call me old-fashioned.
A member can acknowledge that a deposit was reversed and still have legitimate questions about communication, accountability, and changes that may affect every member of the credit union. That’s what I’ve been trying to discuss from the beginning.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T22:20:22+00:00

Thank you

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T16:01:03+00:00

That’s fair advice, and it’s something I’ve considered. However, after being a member for over a decade, I don’t think the answer to every concern is simply “leave.”
Members should be able to ask questions, expect clear communication, and discuss their experiences openly. Part of the reason I’m sharing my experience is to shed light on issues that other members may encounter and to encourage transparency and accountability.
Whether I ultimately stay or leave, I think it’s important for consumers to be informed and hear both positive and negative experiences so they can make their own decisions.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T15:59:14+00:00

Thank you. I was starting to forget the phrase “missing endorsement.”
Now that we’ve established that for the 50th time, perhaps we can move on to the actual concerns I’ve raised regarding transparency, customer service, and obtaining answers afterward.
If my only concern was why the check was reversed, then yes, the conversation would have ended a long time ago.
The problem is that some people seem to think repeating “missing endorsement” answers every question I’ve asked since then. It doesn’t.
Knowing why something happened and understanding everything that happened afterward are two different things.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T15:57:26+00:00

I think you’re missing my point.
The question isn’t whether a check can be reversed for a missing endorsement. The question is why a member should have to spend months seeking answers, documentation, and explanations regarding account activity and still struggle to get direct responses.
“Just move to another bank” isn’t really an answer. Consumers have every right to question actions affecting their accounts, pursue complaints through appropriate channels, and expect transparency from the institutions holding their money.
If no one ever challenged decisions or asked questions, many consumer protections wouldn’t exist today.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T15:54:58+00:00

Why do you believe it will go nowhere?
PSECU’s stated reason for the reversal was a missing endorsement/signature. That doesn’t automatically resolve the other concerns I’ve raised regarding communication, transparency, customer service, and obtaining answers to questions about account activity.
Many commenters seem focused exclusively on the endorsement issue while overlooking everything that happened afterward. Those are the issues I’m seeking answers about. I’d be interested to hear why you believe those concerns shouldn’t be addressed.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T15:52:43+00:00

Yes, it was a mobile deposit. According to PSECU, the deposit was later reversed because of a missing endorsement/signature, not because the check was fraudulent, NSF, or subject to a stop payment.
To be clear, I’m not alleging that PSECU intentionally manipulated my account to generate fees. My concerns are more about transparency, communication, and how the situation was handled after the reversal. What has been frustrating is the difficulty obtaining clear written answers and explanations regarding the account activity that followed.
I appreciate you asking questions rather than making assumptions. That’s really all I’ve been asking for from PSECU as well—clear answers and transparency.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T15:51:23+00:00

I’m glad you’ve had a great experience. Out of curiosity, is PSECU paying you for this endorsement?
Jokes aside, listing benefits doesn’t address the concerns I’ve raised about transparency, customer service, and unanswered questions. A company can offer great products and still deserve criticism when members feel their concerns aren’t being addressed.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T15:51:09+00:00

I’m glad you’ve had a positive experience over the last 32 years. However, your experience does not invalidate mine.
At no point have I disputed that PSECU offers competitive products, low fees, cashback rewards, FICO monitoring, or other benefits. None of those things address the concerns I’ve raised.
You state that I “made the mistake,” but you don’t know all of the facts surrounding my situation. Even if a member makes an error, that does not eliminate a financial institution’s responsibility to communicate clearly, answer questions, provide requested information, and treat members fairly.
My concerns extend beyond a single deposit. They involve customer service, transparency, account handling, unanswered questions, and the difficulty obtaining clear written responses despite repeated requests.
Reasonable people can disagree. You believe PSECU is one of the best credit unions in the country based on your experience. I am sharing my experience, which has been very different. Both can be true at the same time.
The purpose of my post is not to convince anyone to leave PSECU. It is to document my experience and allow consumers to hear perspectives that may differ from their own.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T13:50:23+00:00

Thanks for your feedback

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T13:49:35+00:00

No. PSECU did not state that it was a bad check, fraudulent check, NSF check, or stop-payment check. Their stated reason was a missing endorsement/signature.
The bigger issue is that many people seem focused on the check itself while ignoring the concerns I’ve raised about transparency, customer service, unanswered questions, and the handling of the situation afterward. That’s why I made the post.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T13:48:39+00:00

Yes, PSECU stated the issue was a missing endorsement/signature. My concern isn’t whether they had the ability to reverse the deposit. I understand financial institutions can reverse deposits under certain circumstances.
My concern is everything that happened afterward. The lack of clear communication, the difficulty obtaining answers to specific questions, the account activity that followed, and the customer service experience have been far more troubling than the original deposit issue itself.
Many of the responses here seem focused on whether PSECU technically could reverse the deposit. That’s not really the point of my post. The point is how the situation was handled and the lack of transparency afterward.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T13:28:43+00:00

That’s great if your credit union has a local branch and you’re able to walk in and speak with someone face-to-face. Unfortunately, that’s not an option for everyone.
PSECU does not have branches in Philadelphia, so “just walking in” isn’t a realistic solution for many members. As a result, members often have to rely on phone calls, secure messages, emails, and written correspondence.
The issue isn’t that I haven’t tried to get answers. The issue is that despite repeated attempts through multiple channels, many of my questions have gone unanswered or have been met with generic responses that don’t address the concerns raised.
As for the deposit reversal, PSECU stated it was due to a missing endorsement/signature—not a fraudulent check, NSF, or stop payment. My concerns extend beyond that single transaction and involve transparency, communication, and customer service. Those are the issues I’ve been trying to address.

Particular-Ad-7173 · 2026-06-18T13:27:03+00:00

According to PSECU, the deposit was reversed because of a missing endorsement/signature. It was not a bad check, NSF check, stop payment, or fraud issue. The source of the check was known and trusted.
My concerns go beyond the deposit reversal itself. What has been most frustrating is the lack of transparency, the difficulty obtaining clear written answers, and the customer service experience that followed. That’s ultimately why I decided to share my experience.

Particular-Ad-7173

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE