Product: Vehicle loan or lease

Complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Complainant : XXXX XXXX Phone XXXX SSN : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Company : XXXX XXXX  : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX : XXXX ) Date of Incident : XX/XX/XXXX Complaint Summary : I am filing this complaint against XXXX  for deceptive practices, breach of contract, XXXX  discrimination, and retaliation. Despite my full compliance with all documentation requirements and verification steps, XXXX  abruptly terminated my purchase of a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX newer, higher-quality vehicleafter I expressed concerns about potential XXXX  bias in their treatment of my application. This termination, alongside inconsistencies in their explanations, raises serious concerns about XXXX  practices.

Details of the Complaint : 1. Initial Approval and Purchase Process : I initially attempted to purchase a XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX, completing all required verifications, including a three-way call with XXXX  and my bank to confirm documentation. However, upon inspection, I discovered undisclosed damage to the vehicle that was not listed on the XXXX report, which raised concerns of deceptive practices in selling damaged vehicles. 
I rejected the XXXX XXXX and selected a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX with lower mileage and in better condition. XXXX confirmed that all verifications from the XXXX XXXX transaction would apply to the XXXX XXXX XXXX, and no additional documentation was required. The same official check was used, and I completed the process by uploading my insurance and signing t

he Retail Installment Agreement. 2. Verification Process and Selection of Vehicle : I
completed the verification process for the XXXX XXXX XXXX, with XXXX verifying all necessary documentation. The process was fully completed, and XXXX confirmed my pickup appointment for the XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX 
After the vehicle selection and verification process were fully completed, I voiced my concerns to XXXX, explaining that I felt I had experienced XXXX  bias during the verification. I felt that, as an XXXX applicant, I was subjected to increased scrutiny and

additional barriers in a way t hat seemed unnecessary and discriminatory. 3. Sudden Termination by a Closed Department : Following my expression of concern about XXXX bias, XXXX suddenly denied my application for the XXXX XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, just hours before my scheduled pickup, I received an email stating that my purchase was terminated due to potentially false or misleading information, without specifying which documents were allegedly problematic.

When I inquired further, I was informed that the department responsible for this decisionthe Treasury Operations Departmenthad been closed on XX/XX/XXXX due to XXXX XXXX. Yet, XXXX claimed that the

decision to deny my application was made on this day. This inconsistency suggested that there was no thorough review or valid reasoning behind the denial, and I was not provided with any specific explanation. 4. Questionable and Retaliatory Behavior : XXXX termination of my purchase directly after I expressed concern about XXXX  bias raises the question of whether my application was denied in retaliation for bringing up discrimination. This abrupt change in their response, coupled with their unwillingness to specify which documents they deemed potentially false, suggests that their actions were not rooted in the validity of my application but rather in bias. 
XXXX subsequently blocked my phone number, messaging app, and other contact methods, leaving me without any means to clarify or resolve the m

atter. 5. Lack of Transparency and Documentation : Despite my complian
ce with all requirements, XXXX has refused to provide a clear explanation or specify which documents they found potentially fraudulent. I have retained extensive documentation, including audio and video recordings of my conversations with XXXX, as well as a screen recording of my signed contract, all of which substantiate my full compliance with their requirements.

The departments claim that it reviewed my documentation on a day it was closed further supports that this decision was not based on any genuine assessment or valid concern, undermining XXXX reasoning entirely. 

In summary, XXXX actions suggest both discriminatory and retaliatory practices, as well as a failure to provide transparency. They initially approved my documentation and vehicle selection, only to terminate the contract without specific cause after I raised concerns about XXXX  bias. This sudden denial by a department allegedly closed for a holiday and their refusal to specify any legitimate issue with my documentation raise serious questions about XXXX commitment to fair and lawful business practices.