The $3.6 billion CAMPUS USA Credit Union asked a Florida judge to dismiss a $90 million civil lawsuit brought by three members who alleged they suffered race, sex and national origin discrimination when they applied for a loan.
In addition to the alleged discrimination, CAMPUS USA members Renda Okike, Amanda Okike and Chidozie Okike accused the Newberry, Fla.-based credit union of negligence, unfair lending practices, false report to law enforcement, defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
CAMPUS USA, in its August court filing, argued the allegations should be dismissed because they do not constitute valid legal claims under Florida law. However, an investigation by the Alachua County Equal Opportunity Office (ACEOO) concluded that based on the testimony and documentation reviewed, “there is sufficient evidence to make an inference of disparate treatment” against Amanda and Renda (white females) and Chidozie (a black, Nigerian-American male).
The ACEOO report included evidence contradicting a CAMPUS USA compliance employee’s claim that she did not know the applicants’ race or sex. A police recording revealed the employee had allegedly referenced these characteristics during the call, and the report noted alleged inconsistencies in the reasons given to the Okikes for the loan denial.
The ACEOO report was completed in March. By July, the Okikes filed their $90 million lawsuit in Alachua County’s Eighth Judicial Circuit Court in Gainesville.
“CAMPUS USA Credit Union denies the allegations set forth in the lawsuit. CAMPUS does not discriminate in any form, and does not consider an applicant’s race, gender, national origin or any protected characteristic in its underwriting decisions,” CAMPUS USA Chief Legal Officer Gabe Hamlett said.
“Regarding the loan application in question, the loan was declined based on the 11 objective reasons of the Final Investigative Summary by the Alachua County Equal Opportunity Office,” he added. “CAMPUS also respectfully disagrees with the findings set forth in the Final Investigative Summary. The reasons initially provided for the loan denial were consistent with the reasons provided in the required Adverse Action Notice. The individual who made the decision to request the law enforcement well-being check did not know the race of the parties involved when the decision was made to request the well-being check.”
The contentious incident that led to the lawsuit began on a sunny day on Saturday, March 30, 2024 when the Okikes, wearing casual clothes and sunglasses, walked into a CAMPUS USA branch to apply for a $33,000 unsecured personal loan. According to court documents, Chidozie, 34, describes himself as a sales expert for the Morgan Auto Group in Tampa and owns an auto and truck leasing services business. Amanda, 45, is a skin care specialist at Ageless Spa in Gainesville and an assistant manager at AMSCOT Financial in Ocala. Renda, 42, is director of clinical services for Palm Garden in Gainesville.
While the Okikes were going through the loan’s paperwork, things got rather confusing and raised red flags with CAMPUS USA staff, according to the ACEOO complaint.
The member service representative (MSR) said Chidozie was allegedly controlling the loan process even though he was not applying for it in his name. When the MSR asked who was applying for the loan, Chidozie said the two females.
When the MSR asked about the specific purpose for the personal loan, Amanda said it was to purchase land, but Chidozie stated it was to buy a mobile home. When asked about income, Amanda said she earned about $30,000 annually, but Chidozie intervened and told her she made $4,000 monthly and that she “needed to do the math right.”
When the MSR asked about their relationship to one another, the women said they are family while Chidozie stated the women are his friends. When the MSR asked for specific relationship information, the women stated they were like sisters but technically, they were cousins.
The Okikes’ lawsuit, however, claimed they answered truthfully, when they told the MSR that they are family. Chidozie and Amanda are partners and Renda is their best friend, and they have shared the same residence for over a year, it said.
“The MSR repetitively asking us how we were related, even after (we) answered, made us feel very uncomfortable,” the Okikes’ lawsuit stated.
They became upset when the MSR and branch manager informed the women their loan application had been declined because it did not meet the in-branch loan approval guidelines of prior debt obligations, reported length of employment and residency, reported delinquencies, credit scores and account openings.
As the MSR was providing the reasons for the loan denial, Chidozie abruptly stood up, cutting off the MSR, and said, “Let’s go” to Amanda and Renda. The trio, however, later returned to the branch. Chidozie asked to speak with the branch manager. His alleged aggressive demeanor alarmed the MSR, according to the ACEOO report.
After the branch manager explained why the loan was denied and offered to submit their application to the central lending division for reconsideration, Chidozie said they could not wait because they needed the loan that day and left the branch.
Later that day, the MSR sent an email to CAMPUS USA’s legal and fraud departments describing her interactions with the Okikes. This is standard practice for the branch staff to report potential red flags of possible fraud or suspicious behavior.
The MSR said she felt the red flags were the inconsistent responses the women gave regarding their income, the purpose of the loan and the reluctance to provide the nature of their relationship. The MSR also grew concerned when Chidozie answered for the women, appearing to control the meeting even though he was not applying for the loan; his alleged aggressive behavior after the loan was declined and his insistence of needing the loan proceeds that day. The MSR also noted that Renda was wearing sunglasses in the branch and appeared to have a black eye.
What’s more, the day before the Okikes applied for the loan, the MSR also noted in her email that Chidozie conducted a large cash advance on his credit union credit card and acted "weird" during that transaction. He obtained a $20,000 cash advance from his credit union credit card and a $5,000 withdrawal from his savings account.
In the lawsuit, Mr. Okike denied being aggressive or that he was acting weird.
“During our whole encounter with the MSR, the branch manager and any members of the CAMPUS USA staff, no voices were raised, no offensive words were used, and we were very respectful while we expressed our grievances to the bank manager,” the lawsuit stated.
On April 1, 2024, a CAMPUS USA compliance employee reviewed the MSR’s email about the interactions with the Okikes. The employee decided to report the incident to police and requested a well-being check for Amanda and Renda. A police officer interviewed the women individually who said everything was fine and that they did not feel coerced or in danger. Renda said her eye was swollen from an allergic reaction.
Later, the compliance manager spoke with the Okikes on the phone and informed them that she requested a well-being check. The Okikes stated they felt the police report was racially motivated.
After reviewing the police report and a recording of the credit union’s call to police, the Okikes claimed “multiple false statements, discriminatory and defamatory allegations were made targeting Mr. Okike.”
“Campus falsely stated to law enforcement that Ms. Renda had a black eye and was covering up (the) black eye with her glasses,” the Okikes’ lawsuit alleged. “This was a completely fabricated statement made to law enforcement because she did not have (a) black eye. Nothing about a black eye was even mentioned while we were at the bank.”
The compliance employee told the Okikes her decision to contact police was based solely on the red flags identified during their interaction with staff and the reported black eye. The compliance employee also said she did not even know their races or ethnicities.
However, a recording of the police call showed the compliance employee included visual descriptions of the Okikes by race and sex from their IDs, according to the ACEOO report.
The Okikes are seeking a jury trial.
Peter Strozniak can be reached at pstrozniak@cutimes.com.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.