NFCU-FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS!

[fishbjc]

And a HUGE Thank You to all who have served!  Also, to the family members who also serve our country by supporting their family members and loving friends!  You all deserve a huge hug!

My brother-in-law served in the Navy and is retired.  Through him my husband was able to gain membership and I through my husband.

Family members also serve.  We miss our loved ones tremendously and they give up SO MUCH to continue to protect our country. 

[xerostatus]

---

@PokemonMaster wrote:

---

@nikkiheaven wrote:

UUm, you can join if you live with someone that is a member, you can join that way.  That is how I join.  I walked into Navy Federal with my NOW mother in law.  I was living with her at the time while I did an internship.  She was not my mother in law at the time, and they said I could join because we lived together.

---

Just because a CSR told you that you were eligible because your roommate/SO/etc is a member does not make you actually eligible. That just means that said employee was wrong. Some people in this thread do not seem to understand what a household legally is. Just because you live with someone does not make you and them members of the same household. If you live with roommates you are not one household but each your own separate household hence why you file taxes separately. You can even be a member of your parents household until you turn 24. That is why when you fill out FAFSA after that age you have to file as independent even if you still live with them.

If you did get in that way let me say congrats to you on getting into NFCU. Just don't rock the boat and get on the wrong side of the Security Department. Because they won't have any of that nonsense.

---

According to who? Household members are eligible, it's been verified/confirmed/reconfirmed countless number of times in the past, from CSRs, from personal experience(s), anecdotal evidence, etc. Household members, as defined by NFCU themselves, can be roommates. What is so tricky about that interpretation? 

If we are to be totally frank here, I've heard somewhere that the apparent "loose" definition they have for "household members" is supposed to stem from their desire to address the "domestic" partnerships issue. They don't want to necessarily align themselves socio-politically on that particular sticky issue, so they casted a wide net to make sure nobody in that particular context is excluded nor explicitly allowed. "Household members are eligible" is a helluva lot more PC than "same-sex partners are eligible."

But again, this is up to NFCU to define and enforce. And so far, roommates aka "household members" are in fact, eligible. 

[Cstone87]

Ok I don't know how the mods allow it, but the constant FRAUD accusations are annoying and on par with a 4 year old petulant child screaming they know everything. How many USDOJ Attorneys/AUSAs can opine on this Fraud subject involving the OP?

What the OP did isn't FRAUD, if the Credit Union defines that household members are eligible but only meant family related, then that's a lack of articulating, and thus not the OPs problem. This incessant and conjecture of Fraud on these boards is annoying and conflates the truth as to how it pertains to the fact and the law. Seriously the mods need to nip this. Libel, especially when flimsy is something FICO is putting themselves at risk of by sancitioning this type of "agitprop speech". Especially when someone cries to an entity like the DOJ et al. I would refrain from this, have a constructive dialogue but irresposile and libelous misleading statements that are based on nothing is sicking and annoying. 

[Anonymous]

---

@Cstone87 wrote:

Ok I don't know how the mods allow it, but the constant FRAUD accusations are annoying and on par with a 4 year old petulant child screaming they know everything. How many USDOJ Attorneys/AUSAs can opine on this Fraud subject involving the OP?

What the OP did isn't FRAUD, if the Credit Union defines that household members are eligible but only meant family related, then that's a lack of articulating, and thus not the OPs problem. This incessant and conjecture of Fraud on these boards is annoying and conflates the truth as to how it pertains to the fact and the law. Seriously the mods need to nip this. Libel, especially when flimsy is something FICO is putting themselves at risk of by sancitioning this type of "agitprop speech". Especially when someone cries to an entity like the DOJ et al. I would refrain from this, have a constructive dialogue but irresposile and libelous misleading statements that are based on nothing is sicking and annoying. 

---

I think you need to actually read through this entire thread prior to forming an opinion on it and throwing around words like "libel". In regards to the OP, blatant fraud. -Read the thread-.

Secondly, their was further conversation on the question of membership guidelines and discussion on what is/isn't acceptable for membership. Sounds to me like you are mixing up two very different discussions within the same thread.

[skigirl916]

---

@Cstone87 wrote:

Ok I don't know how the mods allow it, but the constant FRAUD accusations are annoying and on par with a 4 year old petulant child screaming they know everything. How many USDOJ Attorneys/AUSAs can opine on this Fraud subject involving the OP?

What the OP did isn't FRAUD, if the Credit Union defines that household members are eligible but only meant family related, then that's a lack of articulating, and thus not the OPs problem. This incessant and conjecture of Fraud on these boards is annoying and conflates the truth as to how it pertains to the fact and the law. Seriously the mods need to nip this. Libel, especially when flimsy is something FICO is putting themselves at risk of by sancitioning this type of "agitprop speech". Especially when someone cries to an entity like the DOJ et al. I would refrain from this, have a constructive dialogue but irresposile and libelous misleading statements that are based on nothing is sicking and annoying. 

---

Fraud, by definition, is deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.  No libel has taken place here, as any statement having a tendency to affect one's reputation must first be false in order to be actionable. :::shrug:::

[Anonymous]

---

@Cstone87 wrote:

Ok I don't know how the mods allow it, but the constant FRAUD accusations are annoying and on par with a 4 year old petulant child screaming they know everything. How many USDOJ Attorneys/AUSAs can opine on this Fraud subject involving the OP?

What the OP did isn't FRAUD, if the Credit Union defines that household members are eligible but only meant family related, then that's a lack of articulating, and thus not the OPs problem. This incessant and conjecture of Fraud on these boards is annoying and conflates the truth as to how it pertains to the fact and the law. Seriously the mods need to nip this. Libel, especially when flimsy is something FICO is putting themselves at risk of by sancitioning this type of "agitprop speech". Especially when someone cries to an entity like the DOJ et al. I would refrain from this, have a constructive dialogue but irresposile and libelous misleading statements that are based on nothing is sicking and annoying. 

---

And if you read all threads you will see that OP posted  how she has a "friend with benefits" and cited them as a "family member" for eligibility. For those who choose to use FRAUDULENT methods to join, have the sense not to post and brag about it on forums. For those of us who are legitimate members, we do not support nor will we 'congratulate' you for joining by deception

[09Lexie]

Locking as all that can be said, has been said on this thread.  

Lexie, myFICO Moderator