Credit Union Guides Only Customer Service Number, Claims "No Customer Damage"...Website States 'Phone Inquiries Limited to Simple Questions'

The National Credit Union Federation (NCUF) has been found to have guided affected customers only to a phone consultation number following a system outage that disrupted financial services, without separately informing them of formal complaint filing procedures. In particular, the credit union has restricted phone complaint intake to simple inquiries only, drawing criticism for taking a passive approach to consumer protection following the financial accident.

According to the NCUF on the 10th, the credit union posted an apology on its website on the 3rd and apologized for the system outage that occurred the previous day.

The credit union explained that on the afternoon of the 2nd, temporary overload occurred during information processing between internal computer systems, resulting in disruptions to some financial services.

It stated that it had sequentially restored key systems and normalized all financial services that day, but the official website apology and guidance were made the following day.

The guidance at the time stated, "Inquiries on related matters can be directed through the Credit Union Customer Service Center (1566-6000)." There was no explanation of formal complaint filing or damage relief procedures.

The credit union's phone complaint filing criteria limit phone complaints to cases that do not require documentary proof or are simple inquiries not directly related to financial complaints.

Meanwhile, the online complaint channel, which handles complaints and objections related to financial transactions, is operated separately.

Nevertheless, customers who experienced the system outage were guided only to the general customer service phone number.

Under these circumstances, the credit union maintains the position that "no financial damage has been confirmed from this system outage."

This has drawn criticism that there was insufficient concrete guidance on where to file complaints arising from financial transaction disruptions and what procedures to follow for damage relief.

Questions have also been raised about the criteria for damage assessment. The concern is whether inconvenience from suspension of financial transactions is being excluded from damages on the grounds that financial losses could not be confirmed.

If remittance delays resulted in late fees or penalties, damages could be calculated, but it is difficult to quantify financially the operational disruptions from transaction delays, loss of economic opportunities, and time loss from repeated transaction attempts.

Mr. Chun M. (39, Bundang-gu, Seongnam), who uses the credit union as his primary bank, said, "When I needed to send money but could not transfer it, I tried again several times," and asked, "Even if the transaction was eventually processed, isn't the inconvenience and operational disruption I experienced during that time damage?"

Another customer, Mr. An M. (33, Gangnam-gu, Seoul), said, "It is difficult to prove how much financial damage I suffered, but since financial transactions were unavailable, I had to find alternative methods and waste time," adding, "I was appalled by the credit union's attitude of viewing the inconvenience experienced by customers not as damage but as an inquiry."

In fact, the credit union has not disclosed specific details such as the number of failed access attempts during the accident, the number of transactions that failed to be processed after transfer attempts, and the number of accident-related inquiries and complaints filed with the customer service center.

Article 27 of the current Electronic Financial Transactions Act requires financial companies to reflect users' legitimate opinions and complaints and establish procedures for damages compensation.

Article 14 of the enforcement decree of the same law also specifies that dispute resolution managers and officials be designated and their contact information be made available to users through the internet and other means.

While there is no legal obligation to establish a separate accident-specific reporting channel, whether responding by failing to introduce already-established complaint and dispute resolution procedures in accident guidance aligns with the duty of financial consumer protection is a matter worth examining.

The credit union states that it is examining the exact cause of the system outage and its impact on customer transactions, but has not disclosed the specific scope of damage confirmation and investigation results.

A credit union official stated, "If damage is confirmed, we will take measures according to relevant procedures and standards."