Aug 5 (Reuters) - USAA, the financial services company

serving military personnel and their families, will pay $62.4

million to resolve a lawsuit claiming it overcharged service

members and veterans on interest rates and fees.

A preliminary settlement of the proposed class action was

filed on Friday night in the federal court in Elizabeth City,

North Carolina, and requires approval by U.S. District Judge

Terrence Boyle. USAA denied wrongdoing.

The lawsuit covers tens of thousands of service members with

credit card and other loans at USAA Savings Bank and USAA

Federal Savings Bank in various periods since May 4, 2009.

They accused USAA of violating the federal Servicemembers

Civil Relief Act, Military Lending Act and Truth in Lending Act

by failing to cap interest rates at 6% during active duty and

permanently forgive interest above 6%.

Service members said they didn't discover the errors until

2021 when USAA sent "misleading" correspondence and courtesy

checks that understated the refunds they were owed.

They also said they weren't fully compensated by 859,000

checks that USAA sent out after reaching consent orders in 2019

and 2020 with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

addressing other violations.

Boyle approved similar settlements of $41.9 million with

Bank of America ( BAC ) and $62.5 million with JPMorgan Chase ( JPM )

in 2018 and 2020, respectively.

In a statement, San Antonio, Texas-based USAA said it

strongly disagreed with the accusations, but the settlement lets

it avoid lengthy and expensive litigation.

It also said it charges lower interest rates than the law

requires, and that about half the settlement is to reissue

checks that members never cashed.

The plaintiffs' lawyers may seek up to 27.5%, or $17.7

million, from the settlement for fees and expenses.

Founded in 1922, USAA has about 13.5 million members and

recently ranked 103rd in Fortune magazine's list of the 500

largest U.S. companies by revenue.

The case is Bulls et al v USAA Federal Savings Bank et al,

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of North Carolina, No.

21-00488.