Consumer complaint received 2017-11-20
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: FL
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Sub-issue: Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone

Complaint:
I leased a XXXX XXXX back in 2013 for 2 years. When the lease ended, the inspector from XXXX XXXX XXXX ( not an independent inspector, which would be far more appropriate here ) said my tires had too little tread by 1/8 of an inch ( which is hard to even measure ) despite the fact that there was plenty of tread on the tires ( I sent in photos to XXXX XXXX XXXX twice to show this ) and the car was only leased for 2 years with very little mileage. I contested this claim when the inspector first measured the tires, and I contested this charge every single time I spoke to someone from XXXX XXXX XXXX for at least one year. When I would receive calls from their representatives, they would say in so many words that their position on this issue is final and there is nothing I can do about it other than pay the money. 

The problem and the reason why I believe there is a major consumer protection issue here is there is no way for the consumer to successfully contest the charges their biased, non-independent inspectors assess against people like me. I was assessed over {$600.00} in costs for two tires that they said had too little tread by 1/8 of an inch. They could have just as easily charged me {$1500.00} or {$5000.00}. In any of these cases, I wouldve had the same problem : no matter how hard I would have tried to explain why these are faulty charges, their representatives would have given the same response, which is something along the lines of This is what our inspector said. Therefore, this is what you have to pay. Period. 

At the root of the problem is the fact that XXXX XXXX XXXX ' entire business model provides no incentive to do what is right for consumers. They are not part of dealerships that feel the need to provide good customer service to win more customers over time. And they are not part of XXXX the manufacturer that also feels the need to provide good customer service to convince customers to purchase more of their cars over time. Instead, because their business model only involves financing transactions and collecting payment for damages when cars are returned, they have every incentive to train their inspectors to over-inspect, meaning find damages where they should not and extract more dollars from the customer as a result. 

I spoke to XXXX XXXX XXXX 's representatives numerous times to explain my case. Their reps said over and over there was nothing I could do to reverse these charges. I sent in photos. XXXX XXXX said the photos were never received and that there was never a conversation when photos were mentioned. I asked for the recordings of the calls. This request was denied. Again, the customer ( me ) is forced to just take their word for it. I then sent in the photos again. There is clearly tread visible. I can easily get my fingernail in the tread. This is more than 1/8 of an inch of tread. XXXX XXXX said the photos are not good enough because I didnt use an official measuring tool. Give me a break. XXXX XXXX then said her representatives called trying to offer me a heavy discount on the charges months ago. After two years of their representatives telling me the same thing, I stopped answering their calls, but there was never a voicemail left offering a significant discount or letter received that offered a significant discount. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX sent a late payment notice to the credit bureaus 3 years after trying to take this money from me. This has hurt my credit meaningfully. They offered a discounted price again but said they will not notify the credit bureaus that this was an open dispute all along, as it was. The whole thing feels like a big scam and consumer protection issue. Hopefully this well help resolve this. Thank you.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation