Product: Vehicle loan or lease

This complaint has more than one possible course of action. 
In XX/XX/XXXX, I ( XXXX XXXX ) had returned from XXXX and purchased a motorhome from a dealer in XXXX XXXX, XXXX. The motorhome was listed at {$190000.00}. After a {$20000.00} down payment, taxes and titling fees, the balance was financed through US Bank XXXX XXXX. 
While residing in XXXX, my spouse - XXXX XXXX - contacted XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX ( a XXXX Agency ) to insure the vehicle against loss as required by the lean holder. She made statements and representations to the Agent that she did not want to suffer a financial hardship should she lose the use of the motorhome. The agent made no statements to GAP insurance or replacement cost versus actual cash value. 
In XXXX, we moved to XXXX state and were required by the insurance company to change agencies. XXXX contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX ( a XXXX Agency ) and restated her situation. The company re-wrote the policy based on the XXXX  State Address. It was later found XXXX XXXX XXXX was a XXXX  based company. 
In XX/XX/XXXX, there was an electrical issue with the inverter and the outlets internal to the motorhome. We brought the motorhome to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) where they discovered rodents had compromised the electrical wiring in the motorhome. 
XXXX sent an appraiser out to XXXX XXXX XXXX and estimated the cost of repair beyond the reasonable value of the motorhome. In addition to the damage by the rodents to the wires, there may be additional hazards including diseases carried by the rodents. 
XXXX has offered approximately {$47000.00} in settlement for the motorhome. US Bank loan principal is {$64000.00}. 
This creates several situations where the borrower is harmed by the loan continuance. First, the borrower is self-employed and qualifying for loans while self-employed is virtually impossible. The credit ratings of the borrower have changed and is most likely not able to secure reasonable financing. The insurance agents did not protect the best interests of the consumer in contradiction to the Federal Fair Trade Practices by not exploring GAP insurance or replacement costs with the insured. 
The bank is willing to accept the insurance company pay off and insists that the borrower continues to pay the original ( payment ) amount of the loan agreement to terminations. In doing so, such an agreement would preclude the borrower from making arrangements for another vehicle. 
Through the CFPB, the borrower petitions the Board to investigate and assist in the negotiations or direct US Bank to accept the payout by XXXX XXXX and continue the loan at a reprojected term such that the borrower continues to pay the remaining balance at the contractually stated interest rate of 5.99 % for the remaining term of the loan ( 66 months ) and monthly payments of approximately {$380.00} per month. 
US Bank has offered to enrich themselves by offering a personal loan subject to normal underwriting conditions to include origination fees and a higher interest rate or the borrower could continue to pay the {$950.00} projected in the original contract. In doing so, US Bank would force the small business owner into bankruptcy.