Consumer complaint received 2016-11-04
Company: Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.
State: CA
Product: Consumer Loan
Sub-product: Vehicle loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease

Complaint:
XXXX reported XXXX ( 30 ) days on my credit report for XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX. I reported them to the California State Attorney 's General Office and XXXX XXXX, XXXX they were removed due to my complaint. Again, Santander is reporting a 30 day late with XXXX and XXXX. Again, they have my credit Hostage. Our payments are due on the XXXXXXXXXXXX. The next three payments were for XXXX over the minimum. The XXXX paid on XXXX XXXX, XXXX paid on XXXX, XXXX paid XXXX. They are reporting that the XXXX payment is 30 days late!! None of these payments are 30 days late. 
I did a response dispute to Santander 's incuarrate pay off amount and Consumer Financial is only allowing ONE BITE OF THE APPLE. 
Santander had to delete ( XXXX ) 30-day lates in a row late, s because the account was paid 4 months in advance not because my last payment brought the account current. The last payment did not total 4 months of payments as they admitted. 
Santander did not respond to my specific disputes regarding the inacurate Pay off Balance. 
Their defense is I do n't UNDERSTAND the Simple Interest Daily Contract Method and I do which is proven in my evidence and the Excel Spreadsheet demonstrating the accurate method without fruad. Santander did not address the Excel Spreadsheet that was provided They claim the first payment was a " Dealer Credit '' and that is FALSE. Even, if, is was a credit it is still treated as a payment and shall be calculated from date of receipt forward. 
Here is the TRUE fact, that overpayment by us to the XXXX dealership was because the payoff of the trade-in disclosed in the Credit Report was more than what we owed. The date of purchase was a Saturday and the bank was closed to verify the pay-off. 
On Monday, I called XXXX to have my money refunded from our down payment and they stated " Santander received our overpayment as demonstrated in their own evidence. 
I contacted Santander and they stated " they were keeping my money and would credit the funds to end of the Contract. '' I told them that was illegal and to refund me ASAP. Finally, they agreed to credit the first payment. That is why there are three ( 3 ) transactions for my overpayment to XXXX pursuant to their own evidence. Santander did not reduce the Unpaid Principal Balance for the FIRST THREE PAYMENTS it remained at XXXX and did not reduce to XXXX, XXXX. 
Santander 's states " the interest begins to accrue from the date the Contract is signed not the first payment due date of XXXX XXXX. '' They admit this fact and Santander finally credited my account on XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( their evidence ) prior to the XXXX XXXX, XXXX due date. 
Therefore, Santander 's claim there were " 45 days between payments. '' is FALSE. The correct days between payments is 16 days. Whether the interest starts from date of purchase or due date the first payment of XXXX they applied interest at XXXX, therefore, the third payment of XXXX can not be applied entirely to the interest. 
Santander pretends that we had check that was drafted on a Close account. That is False. Their own evidence clearly shows ( 3 ) transactions XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX credits and XXXX debit equals XXXX payment. The claim this created accrued interest is FALSE. 
Santander DID NOT dispute my claim of Entire Payments ( late into the contract ) that were applied only to interest, therefore, My Unpaid Principal balance is Correct. I have attached their own evidence of the following payments : DAILY INTEREST RATES ARE LOWER ON EACH UNPAID PRINCIPAL BALANCE PAYMENT 1. Payment XXXX is XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX entire payment applied to interest ; 2.. Payment XXXX is XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX entire payment applied to interest ; 3. Payment XXXX is XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX entire payment applied to interest ; Santander has stated Payment XXXX talks about the due dates of payments but fails to tell

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation