On XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; Consumer purchased used vehicle ( XXXX ) model from said car dealer. The car dealer advisd consumer ; car loan had been approved and included a Warranty Service Protection added to this loan. The loan were through a Credit Union and loan APR were at 10 %. A minimal downpayment were required ; along with proper auto insurance provided by consumer. ( XXXX Loan were with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX/No. Carolina ). 
On XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; car dealer contacted the consumer and advised that the loan actually had n't been approved ; but not to be concerned because a new loan would be drawn up with Wells Fargo Dealer Services and that the loan inclusive of previous purchased options and vehicle protection would be transferred to this new loan. 
Consumer were confused and certainly raised questions as to how something of this level could occur ; from a vehicle not being actually paid through a financing source to a car dealer ; and the consumer assuming a loan actually had been signed ; as consumer did sign all contractual documents and forms at car dealer on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 
On XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; Consumer had been asked to visit the car dealership and sign new contracts and documents for the vehicle. In additional {$250.00} were asked from Consumer for downpayment. XXXX assumed that all information were similar and only the bank had changed. 
In XXXX XXXX ; the vehicle were showing mechanical failures and vehicle had been performing poorly. In XXXX XXXX ; Consumer contacted the car dealer and advised ; that the Warranty Service Protection perhaps may be needed immediately and vehicle were running poorly and engine indicator lights were constant. Vehicle were stalled numerous times and vehicle had been towed for repairs. At that time, Consumer were advised that the Warranty Service Protection were probably a problem ; since most out-of-warranty protection plans have limits and/or expiration dates. In addition, Consumer were then advised that the Warranty Service Protection issue would probably not be resolved during XXXX, due to the fact the protection company actually resposnible for making payments of repairs would not honor the warranty ; since it was n't added to the loan as previously conveyed to Consumer in XXXX XXXX. Consumer advised car dealer that this option was n't acceptable ; and the loan with Wells Fargo Dealer Services ; must be amended and a Warranty Service Protection should be added. Car dealer advised ; probably not an option. Therefore, Car Dealer resorted to remit {$1000.00} to the consumer as a good will gesture ; and drafted a liability Release Statement in order to protect the car dealership from future car repairs and liability. 
It was then understood ; car dealer would speak with WFDS about adding this Warranty Service Protection and see if this would be accepted. Apparently Wells Fardo Dealer did n't accept the amendment and since XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; Wells Fargo Dealer Services has known that consumer were out of Warranty Serice Protection ; and numerous times Consumer had advised WFDS to amend contract and/or work with consumer - in relation to out of pocket enormous amounts of car repairs. WFDS only advised consumer that the loan were already made and no adjustments and/or amendements would be added. And, that only recourse would be to file a complaint against car dealer.. 
The loan to value of the vehicle were financed at {$10000.00}. ; Consumer has paid into loan through XXXX XXXX ; approx. {$3000.00} and paid for car repairs in the amount of {$8200.00} Consumer contends the car dealer changed the loan from 10 % to 17.49 % without advising consumer properly and WFDS received a contract that had been amended one month after another contract had been signed and amended by the car dealer. Consumer contends this loan and purchase are deceptive and an investigation to this matter should be affirmed.