Product: Vehicle loan or lease

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU Plaintiff/Petitioners *Undisclosed on this page Vs Respondent/Defendants NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, al XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Texas XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX, Texas XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TX XXXX XXXX XXXX Employee Specified XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, et al Defendants et, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Ohio XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Consumer Affairs Department XXXX Warranty Extension XXXX XXXX XXXX 1-800-Nissan or XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( Third Party ) Collection Payment Vendor XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX UTAH XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Utah, XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX Defendant, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, Utah XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Defendant/Respondent ALS Resolvion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, Tx XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Defendant/Respondent Facts Related To Administrative Action This Cause of Action involves NMAC Nissan Motor Accept Group. The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau has Jurisdiction in this Matter The Bureau made a ruling against the Respondent Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation On or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX. 

Nissan Settlement Overview Nissan Motor Group Corporation, Responden.t agreed to the stipulation without admission of guilt/no contest no-lo-con-ten-de-re on or about XX/XX/XXXX. 

Nissan Motor Acceptance Group File Number XXXX. 

Petitioners First Assertion Plaintiff/Petitioner asserts that the Respondents continue to violate Federal Law, specifically, 18 U.S. Code 1341s Fraud and Swindles. 

Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish or procure, or theft by conversion, unjust enrichment and personal gain. 


Petitioners Second Assertion The Respondent Nissan continues to breach the binding agreement set forth by the Bureaus Administrative Proceeding ; they unlawfully repossessed the Petitioners vehicle on XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX. 

Petitioners Third Assertion The Respondent shows contempt with continued un-lawful repossessions, misappropriating payments, excessive charges or late fees when payments were made on time, miscellaneous fees, duplications of charges, failing to properly credit the Petitioners account. 


Petitioners Fourth Assertion Respondent did not contact the Petitioner in any written form regarding the matter until XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX. The notice indicated the car had been auctioned on the XXXX of XXXX. It is also noteworthy to mention the document origination date was XXXX XXXX, mailed XX/XX/XXXX received by the Petitioners on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX was forced to advance XXXX and XXXX payments. The Petitioner had made XXXX payment on XX/XX/XXXX Petitioners Fifth Assertion The Petitioner took mitigating action on or about XX/XX/XXXX when he paid through Third Party XXXX {$1400.00} funds are immediately paid to the Respondent. The Petitioner paid a service fee of {$1.00} and was given a transaction code which released the vehicle from the Impound and agreed on by the XXXX XXXX. Petitioner provided the Respondent with transaction numbers the Respondent refused to apply the credit/payment. Misrepresentation that the Petitioners would be able to get their car that day. Respondent made false assertions that they would need to hold the funds for a 10day period. 

Petitioners Sixth Assertion The Petitioners believe it was the intention to deceive them and that Nissan Motor Corporation Group, Its Agents, and Representatives had planned to keep and auction the vehicle. The Petitioners were misled regarding this transaction. It was the intention of the Respondent to auction the vehicle ; withhold or delay applying the wired funds over the {$8.00} fee XXXX XXXX charges. 


Petitioner utilized XXXX XXXX an established vendor for Nissan and the payment accounted before the second payment was sent via XXXX Petitioners Seventh Assertion Petitioners had dozens of conversations to resolve pay system issues but realized it to be wasted time. On or about the XXXX of XXXX the Petitioner secured another {$1400.00} to pay Nissan Motors Acceptance Group a second payment. because they refused to credit the payment made the day before, combined over {$2800.00} in two days. 

Petitioners Eighth Assertion Respondents depraved indifference caused the Petitioners further hardships, related stress, lost income for a week and planned to auction the vehicle after they agreed to release the car back to the Petitioner continuing the deceptive practice and artifice.

Nissan charged XX/XX/XXXX, and XXXX, XXXX duplicate charges of {$540.00} each for miscellaneous fees associated with one unlawful repossession. Petitioners paid to date over {$1000.00} in miscellaneous fees charging {$180.00} in XXXX, {$150.00} in XXXX. Petitioners were forced to pay these excessive late fees and the Respondent combined the last 4 months to charge the account and repossess the car. 

Petitioner was credited only {$67000.00} out of the {$2800.00} toward the loan. XXXX and XXXX payments were not due or late when the Petitioners vehicle was taken the early morning of XX/XX/XXXX. 

Petitioners Tenth Assertion Petitioner paid amounts each month, arranged extensions or Respondent applied payments to the wrong account. Miscellaneous fees have been charged to the account since the conception of the agreement. The fees are taken off the account and added back on the following month and coincide with each payment, charging a late fee in most cases when a fee is not justified.

Petitioners Eleventh Assertion The Respondent has been unclear or can not articulate the principal payments or the interest payments consistently. 

Petitioners Twelfth Assertion Monthly billing statements do not reflect the correct amounts principals, application or follow the I.R.S guidelines as a G.A.A.P. ( Gap Approved Accounting Principal ).

Petitioners Thirteenth Assertion The Petitioner purchased the car on XX/XX/XXXX and asserts the loan was obtained by the Dealership in a deceptive and fraudulent manner. The Petitioners were denied their right to rescind the contract. The dealership used high pressure, intimidation tactics, denied the Petitioner the right to rescind and take back their car used on trade. 

Petitioners was told they had no other options and felt embarrassed they had been taken advantage of by the sales staff. 

Petitioners noticed duplicated charges which totaled {$6400.00} not including interest charges that had been added to their loan. When they presented that to the dealership on XX/XX/XXXX they were told that amount would be reduced from the loan. 

On XX/XX/XXXX the dealership signed the form indicating the over charges but only reduced the loan amount by {$2800.00} leaving the balance owed to the Petitioner {$3600.00}. Additional interest related fees were never taken out of the loan. Total interest charges that should have been reduced from the loan is {$8400.00}. 

The loan was obtained using deceptive practices for unjust enrichment and personal gain. Each time the Petitioner requested resolve or Arbitration they were denied. 

Petitioners Fourteeth Assertion The vehicle was damaged by the vendor Recover Service when took the vehicle unlawfully on XX/XX/XXXX. The XXXX XXXX XXXX  Lock Device was tooled by the recovery agent and can not be utilized. 

XXXX damage was caused on the passenger side of the vehicle and personal items removed from the car. The personal items were never returned. 







SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT Petitioners have filed a claim with the CFPB and reference the Administrative Action taken against the Defendant, Nissan Finance Motor Group.

Petitioners have alleged that the Respondent took or repossessed their car unlawfully and did not forewarn, notify or have legal justification to repossess the vehicle. 

In the days or weeks that followed the repossession the Respondent has over billed, over inflated late fees, duplicated the repossession charge, added finance charges or miscellaneous fees to the loan amount incorrectly. 

Vendors that act or acted as Agents, Representatives and or Employees have misrepresented, made false deceptive and misleading statements to obtain money or property they have not been owed or entitled to take or demand. 

The Repossession Company damaged both the inside gear lock and the outside of the vehicle, as well as kept property that was inside the vehicle at the time it was taken on XX/XX/XXXX. The Office in IXXXX and XXXX have been the most consistent in their misrepresenting the intention to sell the vehicle and their lawful right to take the Petitioners car. 

The Petitioner had made timely payments or by extension made the arrangements to remain current with the last 7 months noted on the history payments from Nissan. 

Nissan demanded that two months not yet due be paid in advance for XXXX and XXXX. Which the Petitioner paid twice. XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Regular payments for XXXX paid on the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX does not reflect the late fees charged on the Petitioners Ledger but is total of {$150.00}, XXXX late fee charged {$180.00} and another XXXX was charged in XXXX which had not come due until 3 days later. 

Petitioner believes that the Respondent had the vehicle towed for unspecific reasons not related to payments or lack of payments. 

The towing company services charged twice to the Petitioner and late fees and miscellaneous fees not explained with any clarity or understood by Nissan employees.

The Petitioner has had nothing but problems from the first step on the Nissan Dealerships Lot. The contract was obtained in a fraudulent manner with the intent to deceive and mislead the Petitioners. Their rights to rescind and take back their trade was denied and they were lied to about the ability to take back their trade. The loan was overcharged almost {$7000.00} and only a portion of the fixed cost were taken out leaving the XXXX balance and interest on the loan. 


Proposed Resolutions Considering Mitigation Or Additional Law Suites planned by the Petitioners Petitioner is willing to work with Nissan o any of these resolutions and will seek relief from the Bureau first and any other venue that has Jurisdiction over this matter. 

( Including but not limited to each vendor ) The Petitioner seeks the maximum {$100000.00} they could have been awarded for arbitration but were denied three times by Nissan as well as the dealership denying them the same right.

The Petitioner will surrender the Vehicle at the designated location specified by Nissan upon receipt of settlement payments as stated in this document unless the Bureau enhances the amounts or restores the Petitioners a higher amount. 

That the Respondent Nissan Motors and any third party update their reporting records to the credit agencies and make the correct entries and show the vehicle as paid in full by Petitioners. 

Petitioners have had their credit destroyed and lost income due to the repossession and negative remarks on the credit reporting systems. The Respondent be held accountable for their deceptive practices as well as potential consideration for charges in the future on a criminal probe for Fraud and Failure to disclose facts they legally are mandated by Truth and Lending Laws and Federal Trading Commission.

The Respondent make available accurate detailed information to their vendors to avoid future exposure to them for unlawful actions they take.

Petitioner has considered all related expenses, payments, insurance, loss of trade in vehicle damages to credit and lost wages which total as follows : Trade In {$14000.00} Payments {$21000.00} Misc Fees {$3000.00} Lost Wages {$2500.00} Borrowed {$2000.00} Transportation 7 days {$26000.00} Missed Appt {$120.00} {$43000.00}