Consumer complaint received 2017-03-16
Company: UNIVERSAL ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION (NE)
State: WA
Product: Consumer Loan
Sub-product: Vehicle loan
Issue: Problems when you are unable to pay

Complaint:
Due to the great recession, my credit has been low since XXXX. I somewhat re-established my credit through Carhop after 2 attempts to payoff a vehicle finally happened in XXXX. A year later, it began to die. I was approved through XXXX for a new XXXX XXXX. Loss of job the next week put me behind. I caught up & almost instantly was forced to move due to a toxic relationship. The finance manager informed me I needed to surrender the car, I could n't afford it, & regardless how much towards the balance I paid it would be repossessed. It was a week later taken & I was stranded. I got a Lyft to Carhop & worked with XXXX, the lot manager at the XXXX branch. He was wonderful. Despite UAC 's 5-hour response time & refusal to finance anything but a XXXX XXXX XXXX ( which decreased my income by a big chunk as I was an XXXX & the XXXX failed to pass the XXXX & gt ; 10 years old requirement ), XXXX deserves high praise & a much better company for which to work. The XXXX I took for a rapid test drive as I was trying to make it to a work shift ( already 2 hours late by this time ). I noted the brakes seemed to have difficulty gripping & the hood latch was gone. XXXX promised to get the issues resolved. After signing, I noticed almost immediately the car 's brakes were completely shot as were the struts & especially rear shocks & thermostat. This car was dangerous to drive. I informed XXXX instantly the following morning & we got the car confirmed through XXXX XXXX of the issues I had cited. 4 days later, UAC denied the repairs as they did not fall under warranty responsibilities. However, the 7-day customer satisfaction guarantee helped XXXX get all but the front struts repaired. The process : over 2 weeks. During that time, I had to replace 3 bulbs & 4 fuses. The check engine light I had checked which alerted a " vapor leak '' aka it needed a new gas cap. I replaced the cap and weeks later, the light remains on. The real issue was payment & my finance manager. I had gotten a sizeable advance in order to pay on my XXXX, but it was taken the next morning. I therefore used that money to put down on the XXXX XXXX {$470.00} XXXX. This cut into my rent nearly 80 %. I spent the next several weeks trying to catch up. The XXXX payment for the XXXX was 2 weeks after purchase. A car wash where I had used my debit card had charged me 3 times ( $ XXXX ) which caused my UAC payment to bounce back. I was unaware of this as the 3 transactions nearly-equaled my bi-weekly payment for the XXXX. I was n't aware until I got the text from UAC stating my XXXX 's starter had been disabled. I had no clue this was part of the agreement I 'd signed. I knew there was a GPS chip, but I had no idea if I was a little late that Carhop would shut my car off. A large enough portion of my income relies on my vehicle & getting to my 2 other jobs requires I have a vehicle. On XX/XX/XXXX, the UAC payment was due to automatically take out my Ion payment. On Monday, I knew my XXXX payment was due to come out as well. Yet somehow, the XXXX payment processed a day early & UAC did not process their payment until afterwards. I called Carhop & XXXX informed me my finance manager was out on a family emergency. I spoke to UAC, offered the {$130.00} I had of the {$190.00} due, they would not accept a partial payment, I expressed my concerns about the car being shut off, they said it had " not gotten to that point yet '', the next morning I missed a call from I assume my finance manager, and instantly afterwards, I got the " cut off '' text. I had to cancel delivering the rest of the afternoon to ensure my car made it home. I had kept up on my end of " keeping communication open '' & still got shut off. It had been ONE BUSINESS DAY & I was shut out of driving my vehicle. This feels wrong, immoral, and is a ridiculous practice. 1 business day is n't enough.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief