Consumer complaint received 2016-09-19
Product: Consumer Loan — Vehicle loan
Issue: Problems when you are unable to pay — 
Company: Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc. (NE)

The auto was placed in repossession status ( as you know on XXXX XXXX ). I was advised to pay XXXX to redeem the vehicle which I originally did on Friday, XXXX XXXX 2016. The auto was picked up at XXXX on Monday the XXXX and sent to auction on Wednesday, the XXXX. I was advised via numerous call on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday to Santander the auto may be moved to auction within XXXX to 72 hours. I figured my call to the company repossessing the vehicle every day and XXXX would prevent that. Also I figured my phone call to Santander, especially, if and when the car was sent to auction they would advise so I could make the appropriate decision to redeem or not redeem the vehicle. The tow company never returned any of my calls and only after I made the payment on Thursday, the XXXX at XXXX central time via money gram, I was advised it was sent to auction on Wednesday. This was unacceptable. I called every day and was advised I made an arrangement to pay on Wednesday that should have prevented this. Also doing my due diligence, I called Santander Wednesday night at around XXXX central time to verify status of the vehicle ( whereabouts ) and amount to redeem. I was advised it was still at the original lot, which I found was untrue. Why would Santander not advise the tow company that I was paying on a specific date to redeem the vehicle? Did Santander no longer care and want to get rid of it asap if I decided not to respond or pay? Regardless of the issue, it 's still customer service. I feel Santander was in collusion with the tow company to sell the vehicle ASAP and also the tow company wanted to get paid for shipping it to the auction when they did not have to. Even the tow driver misrepresented himself at the time of pickup. His name was XXXX and he said, just call Santander, make arrangements and the vehicle will still be here until the XXXX of XXXX and you can pick it up. Myself and XXXX ( primary on the loan ) were XXXX present during that conversation as we removed our belongings from the vehicle. It feels like this was a sneaky business tactic by the tow company. As a result, I incurred additional pain, suffering and expense to retrieve the vehicle. I did contact Santander on Thursday about this issue, but it was not until later in the day that after speaking with more than XXXX individuals, XXXX person with the office of the president decided to do what was right and have my vehicle returned to the original lot of the repo. The only catch to that is that they said they would bill me for having the vehicle returned to the original lot of the repo company and said it could take up to XXXX to 7 days. So once again, I have to pay again in additional costs, interest and fees. This all was an issue because the repo lot was on XXXX Nebraska where I reside and the auction was located in XXXX Kansas XXXX, XXXX miles away ( XXXX XXXX XXXX round trip, about XXXX miles ). With having a family of XXXX and having to go to work every day to continue our livelihood, I had to make the decision quick, to retrieve the vehicle immediately, which I did. 

I understand at the end of the day, it was my responsibility to pay the loan on time and I would have not had to be concerned with late payments, fees and consequences resulting from these things. But as you can understand life does happen and we have laws governing institutions and process to ensure consumers are treated fairly. I was advised during my phone calls to Santander that all other associated fees were to be back billed to the loan. I was advised going forward the loan would be treated as open and active and continue with the original terms, limits, interest rates, fees, etc., set forth but still wo n't be reported to the credit bureaus as open and active. This violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other state and federal laws.