Consumer complaint received 2015-04-02
Company: Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.
State: MD
Product: Consumer Loan
Sub-product: Vehicle loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease

Complaint:
In XXXX XXXX, I financed a car with a XXXX year, XXXX payment loan from XXXX. In XXXX, Santander Consumer USA ( " SCUSA '' ) acquired part of XXXX 's auto loan portfolio and began servicing my loan. On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, SCUSA sent me a Welcome email that attempted to unilaterally change the contract ( attached ). I had just been released from the hospital after surgery for a XXXX XXXX, I was n't in an ideal state of mind to discuss new terms. 

I have made all XXXX payments required under the contract ( attached ) and have full documentation of this, via XXXX my bank and SCUSA statements. Additionally, SCUSA has confirmed my timely payments to the credit bureaus ( see attached ). 

In early XXXX I prepared to make my final payment ( per my maturity date in XXXX XXXX ) ; the SCUSA website indicated a payoff amount of almost {$10000.00}. Shocked, I contacted SCUSA asking for an explanation. Customer service was evasive and refused to provide any useful information, instead forwarding a copy of their Privacy Policy & Opt-Out form ( attached ) for me to sign. Last month I sent a certified letter to SCUSA 's CEO requesting detailed account information clearly indicating payments made, fees assessed and the basis for these under my original contract with XXXX. I have yet to receive a reply. 

A simple review of the numbers reveals the problems with SCUSA 's position. My contract provides for about a {$28.00} fee if my payment is late, so even if my payment were late every time, ( which it was not, as evidenced by SCUSA 's own reporting to XXXX ), the fees over XXXX months would sum only to about {$2000.00}. That 's far less than the amount SCUSA alleges I owe. 

The SCUSA payment history ( example attached ) provided to customers is limited and confusing. The catchall notation " Misc. Fees '' makes it very easy for SCUSA to impose unwarranted fees and to seek money that it is not legally owed. The only identifiable fee in the payment history is the so-called {$10.00} " convenience fee '' I have been charged monthly for online processing to ensure ACH payments are timely applied, thus avoiding interest accrual. In other words, SCUSA charges {$11.00} for cashing my check. 

SCUSA is notorious for billing irregularities. An internet search reveals thousands of complaints that XXXX have had with this bank for similar issues, and multiple lawsuits alleging inappropriate billing practices. For example, in the Powers case against SCUSA ( XXXX XXXX Santander Consumer USA XXXX Inc., Docket # XXXX, D. XXXX. ) the judge noted that SCUSA 's own Senior Vice President " could not determine what particular payment was applied to what month '' and on the subject of late fees, he " could not determine whether an entry titled 'Late charge assessment ' reflected a late charge or did not reflect a late charge. '' The court said that it could n't figure out the fees either. How can SCUSA 's customers be expected to understand this if the bank 's own executives ca n't? Can companies legally demand payment for money they are n't owed? 

In the XXXX case, SCUSA voluntarily agreed to provide the consumer with a schedule itemizing the application of her payments and the effects of each payment on the status of the account. SCUSA also provided details about all invoices and how fees were assessed. If SCUSA can do it for some customers, why not for everyone? 

I have asked SCUSA for my automobile title and to confirm that the loan is paid in full, or a clear explanation for the inflated payoff amount. I fear they will provide neither and simply continue to send invoices for money I do not owe. 

I do not understand how a XXXX bank can send invoices to customers and refuse to provide any reasonable explanation as to the basis for the charges. I believe I am legally entitled at this time to a copy of my contract noted " paid in full, '' and the title for my car.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation