Consumer complaint received 2016-10-20
Product: Consumer Loan — Vehicle lease
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — 
Company: Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc. (MI)

To Chrysler Capital RE : Return of lease car at end of lease Your attached letter dated XXXX/XXXX/2016 requesting an additional {$400.00} payment for exterior damage is a fee that I refuse to pay for the following reasons. 
I met with your representative at my home on XXXX XXXX, 2016. He spent almost a half hour inspecting every inch of the vehicle to determine if there was damage or wear and tear that was my responsibility. That included, inside the engine compartment and trunk, under the car, the interior and all exterior panels. At the conclusion of the inspection, he said the car looked great and everything was fine. He printed out a report that confirmed I did not owe any fees or extra charges and I said to him that " I appreciated having a copy of the report to be able to prove that I did not owe any money for damages or excess wear and tear. ( report copy enclosed ) I turned the car into the dealership within one hour after your inspector completed his inspection. The car has not been in my possession since that time and yet in a letter dated 25 days after the car was out of my control, you are claiming it had {$400.00} in exterior damage. It is unfathomable to me, that you would not have had your inspector inform me of any issue for which I may have been liable when he was standing in my driveway and speaking directly with me about the car 's condition. Further, you have no way of proving to my satisfaction, that the damage you are referring to did not occur after the car was out of my possession. 
Had your inspector told me at the time of the inspection that I owed {$400.00}, I would have had several options to pursue. By not informing me of the problem at the time of the inspection, you denied me the opportunity to affirm or contest the determination, seek a second opinion, negotiate a repair with my dealership as part of the new car deal that was part of this transaction, or arrange to have the repair work completed at my cost at a garage I trust. 
In your {$400.00} demand letter, you also did not recognize the fact that I returned the car five months early, ( and without complaint prepaid the five remaining monthly lease payments ) affording you the opportunity to resell a car that was more valuable than it would have been had I kept it until the end of the lease term. Why was that value not recognized and used to offset the {$400.00}? 
I also want you to know, the dealership that leased me the car I turned in, also leased me a new vehicle to replace this one. They insisted on arranging my new lease with XXXX XXXX because they said Chrysler Financial was playing games with customers and billing them for alleged damages after vehicles were turned in and out of the customer 's and the dealership 's control. 
In addition, it is stunning to me that your XXXX XXXX, letter claims that my liability for repairs is open ended. I quote from your letter : " Please be advised that there might be a subsequent bill that will include any future charges that might become due at a later date. 

For this reason, and the experience I am having that matches perfectly with the dealership described scenario, I am submitting a complaint to the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau about a process that appears to be a scam and not a legitimate damage claim. 
Once again, I am not able to understand why you would not employ a process at the point of inspection that would inform your customers when Chrysler Capital feels there is cause warranting additional payment.