Consumer complaint received 07/24/2015 about Consumer Loan (Installment loan) with CITIBANK, N.A. (NJ).
Issue: Managing the loan or lease

Complaint: Submitted by : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXXXXXXXXXX : One Main Financial, Inc. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXXRegarding the Disclosure Statement, Note and Security Agreement for Account XXXX ; XXXX/XXXX/XXXX : The amount financed was {$9300.00} ; the finance charge amount is {$8400.00}, or ninety percent ( 90 % ) of the secured loan at a rate of {$290.00} per month. The final payment date is listed as XXXX/XXXX/XXXX for a sixty ( 60 ) month period. The APR is quoted as 28.99 %. 
Simple math tells us that the amount the borrower will owe at the end of the sixty ( 60 ) months is {$17000.00} ( $ XXXX {$17000.00} ). It is clear then, that there is no APR of 28.99 % as stated. 

Regarding the debited amount for account XXXX in the monthly statement : The finance charge is again referred to as " interest ''. For this most recent statement, the amount deducted from the borrower 's bank account for the XXXX month of the loan is {$290.00}. Of that amount, {$140.00}, was applied to principal, leaving 52.6 % applied to interest ( $ XXXX $ XXXX {$150.00} ). At no time has the " interest '' for this loan ever been below this amount ( fluctuation between 77 % XXXX % ). And, in fact, it will not, nor can ever be, given that the " interest '' is not interest at all, but a simple calculation of $ XXXX months= {$17000.00}, the original amount of {$9300.00} financed at a rate of 90 %. 

Credit Score on XX/XX/XXXX:XXXXLoan was secured with a XXXX Toyota Corolla. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, borrower met with a representative of One Main Financial @ XXXX to ask if there was a way in which the loan could be converted back to an unsecured loan so that vehicle could be sold and a new car purchased ( to get back and forth to work ). Borrower is a XXXX and has been employed with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX. Driving distance is approximately XXXX miles. 

Amount left due on the loan is stated as {$6400.00}. A payoff figure for that day ( XX/XX/XXXX ) was quoted at approximately {$6300.00}. ( what the borrower will actually be charged in the remaining 29 months for the life of the loan is {$8600.00} ; One Main continues to misrepresent with inaccuracy even the monthly billing statement. ) Payment in the amount of {$9200.00} has been made since XX/XX/XXXX ( {$9500.00} as of XX/XX/XXXX ). 

Borrower was informed that she could do XXXX of XXXX things : Re-apply for a small loan ( {$300.00} ) and the loan could be re-negotiated as unsecured and it was also stated that the monthly amount would be lower ). Given that flipping the loan would increase the debt to {$12000.00} ( + {$570.00} or the amount borrowed at 90 % ), if finance charges of 90 % hold true. This statement by the representative can be construed as Predatory Lending. ORPay {$2000.00}. to reduce the loan amount, thus giving " corporate '', as stated, a reason to consider the request. 

*No TILA was provided to borrower at any time during the loan process. 
Federal law authorizes the OCC to order supervised institutions to make monetary and other adjustments to the accounts of consumers where an annual percentage rate ( APR ) or finance charge was inaccurately disclosed under certain circumstances. XXXXCosts in addition to loan : As a secured loan, One Main Financial required a {$500.00} deductible on Auto Insurance with Collision. This raised the rate for a policy with XXXX XXXX to XXXX per month on a XXXX Toyota , excessive coverage for a XXXX year old vehicle.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief