Product: Vehicle loan or lease

The XX/XX/XXXX the XXXX XXXX requires : the company to test all loans that default in the future to see if the customer had negative income and Santander is required to test all loans that default in the future to see if the consumer, at the time of origination, had a negative income. The test must include an amount for basic living expenses something Santander should have factored in, but did not, in the past. If the loan is found to be unaffordable Santander is required to cancel that loan. 

Despite multiple calls and requests, they have refused to provide any evidence that they have done this leading up to, or since, the vehicle has been charged off. I have requested the documents they used in determining my ability to be a co-signer as well as. They cant test the loan or provide proof they did that because the dealership did not request or require any documents from me that would let them know if I had a negative income.. 
According to the settlement, if a loan holder got a loan with Santander between XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX AND was given a certain internal score at the time of the loan that met the qualifications they were sent a notice and restitution. We received the restitution payment which meant that we fell under the internal scores that were addressed in the Settlement. 

Santander has removed all reporting for XXXX to XXXX ( the only one who continues to have them on my credit report despite my disputes ). I believe they did this in an effort to hide the late payments that started in XXXX and XXXX and the default they issued in XXXX so they would not have to include this loan in the settlement. As you will see below they were reporting, albeit, inaccurately as you can see from the payment ledger, and then just removed all reporting for that time. That didnt make sense until I found the Consent Order by XXXX addressing these continuous issues with credit reporting and ordering them to fix, which they obviously have not and is just another reason why this loan should be canceled by them. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX addressed the following law violations that relate to this loan : ( 1 ) Respondent furnished inaccurate information about consumers credit to Consumer Reporting Agencies ( CRAs ) that it knew or had reasonable cause to believe was inaccurate in violation of 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681-s2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ; ( 2 ) Respondent failed to promptly update and correct information furnished to CRAs that Respondent determined was not complete or accurate in violation of 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) Respondent furnished information to CRAs about severely delinquent or charged-off accounts but failed to furnish Dates of First Delinquency ( DOFDs ) The final issue relates to the extensions they offered and relate to this order : XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 1 ) Respondent misrepresented to consumers the impact of receiving a loan extension, including by obscuring that the additional interest accrued during the extension period would be paid before any payments to principal when the consumer resumed making payments, in violation of sections 1031 and 1036 of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536. Under sections 1053 and 1055 of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. 5563, 5565, the Bureau issues this Consent Order. 

As described in the consent order, the Bureau found that Santander violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 by failing to properly disclose the impact on consumers of obtaining a loan extension, including by not clearly and prominently disclosing that the additional interest accrued during the extension period would be paid before any payments to principal when the consumer resumed making payments. 
Though they do address that interest continues, it also says, Following the extended payments, your next regular payment due date is XX/XX/XXXX and every month thereafter until maturity. Your new maturity date is XX/XX/XXXX. 

It does not say we would have a balance due at the maturity date and is confusing because it says it does not extend any interest on the payments you have not made but then says, interest will be charged for the entire period of the extension. For months after the extension not {$1.00} went to the principal so while they said the extension would only add 1 month to the end of the loan it obviously added on many months of payments since the principal was never getting paid toward at all. 

On XX/XX/XXXX he was given an extension for XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX. In addition to getting a similar Extension Agreement as above ( Im adding them all below ), they only extended the maturity date for 3 months even though they could see that there was no way he would ever catch up since almost no payments were going to the principal leading up to the extension and then with 3 months extension would take almost a year of payments to once again touch the principal. They also have continued to report XX/XX/XXXX as 30 days late even though Ive provided both Santander and XXXX with evidence of the extension that was granted.