Consumer complaint received 01/16/2018 about Vehicle loan or lease (Lease) with SANTANDER CONSUMER USA HOLDINGS INC. (KY).
Issue: Problems at the end of the loan or lease
Sub-issue: Termination fees or other problem when ending the lease early

Complaint: On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I terminated a lease with XXXX XXXX and entered a new lease for a new vehicle. Under the terms of this agreement, the dealer completed a dealer trade-in, buying out my lease and relieving my obligations to the old lease and entering a new lease. 

At that point, I assumed that my obligations under the first lease had been fulfilled and responsibility transferred to the dealer. But the account for the old lease remained listed as open under my name through XXXX XXXX. 

On or around XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I called XXXX XXXX to inquire about this account. They told me they had not received payment from the dealer and not to worry, that it can take 8-12 business days to process a payment. They indicated they could not remove my name from the vehiclewhich at this point was listed for sale by the dealeruntil payment from the dealer had been received. 

I called the dealership and they said payment was sent to XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. I waited to allow time for this to be processed but the account continued to be listed in my name with a next payment due by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 

On or around XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I called the dealer again to confirm payment had been sent. They have me a XXXX tracking number that confirmed receipt of the check on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 

So I called XXXX XXXX again and they said that they could not find the payment anywhere in their system. After being on the phone for over three hours, XXXX XXXX indicated that the dealer had erroneously sent the payment to a third party and the wrong location, as well as failed to check an appropriate box an online process for the dealer trade. At least, this is how it was described to me. I put Chrysler Capital on a 3 way call with thme finance office of the dealership, and the dealership confirmed that they would complete the required box. XXXX XXXX confirmed that, as soon as they did this, the lease account would be satisfied and closed. 

On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I received a call from XXXX XXXX indicating that they now would require the dealership to wire the money because the check delivered on XXXX XXXX was now outdated. But this would require the check to be returned to the dealer first so that the dealership could ensure they wouldnt be double charged. This complete contradicted the initial claim that checking a box in an online system would be sufficient to process the payment. 

By this point, my concerns had been escalated to the highest levels at XXXX XXXX while they refused a simple requestremove my name from the account of a vehicle I no longer owned. XXXX XXXX said they would follow up with me when the dealership received their check back and wired the payment. 

The account was listed as delinquent on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, with a late fee assessed and the account still in my name. On or around XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX called and indicated that they spoke to the dealership, the old check was in their possession, and the money was being wired. They assure me that the account would be resolved within the next 48 hours. After much negotiation and arguing, XXXX XXXX did agree to credit my new account with one months payment for my trouble and at that point I assumed the situation was resolved. 

A week later, on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, the account was still listed as open under my name and delinquent. So I once again called XXXX XXXX and was on the phone for two hours, mostly on hold. I was told first that the vehicle was still at auction and payment had not been received. This made no sense, since the dealership had sold it as a pre-owned vehicle and I had talked to the person who had bought it. So the vehicle has changed hands twice in the intervening six weeksonce to the dealership and again to a new ownerand yet I was still listed as the financially responsible party. I was concerned about an adverse effect on my credit with the account still listed as delinquent under my name. 

After additional delays and talking to additional people, I was told they XXXX XXXX was unsure if the money had been wired and that it could just not have been processed into my account. They assured me that they would look into it. 

On Friday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I received a call back from XXXX XXXX and spoke with XXXX XXXX, who called himself an Assistant Vice President of Consumer Practices. He said he personally spoke with the dealer and that he had " forgiven '' a {$22.00} discrepancy between the amount owed and the dealer 's payment. He indicated that the payment would post to my account no later than Tuesday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 

On Monday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I spoke with the finance XXXX at the dealership who gave me a tracking number of a check mailed on Friday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. They told me that XXXX XXXX  returned a payment by them issued on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, because it was short {$22.00} XXXX the price of the buy-out had increased because of XXXX XXXX XXXX delays ). This contradicts the claims made by XXXX XXXX that they forgave the {$22.00} discrepancy to expedite the process. In addition, according to the tracking number, the check was mailed to the same location as the first check -- contradicting XXXX XXXX XXXX original claim that the first check was sent to the wrong location. 

On Tuesday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, the account was still listed as delinquent. Since XXXX XXXX had promised that this would be processed by this date, I called back. Again, he obfuscated and said that they would need additional time to process the payment. He acknowledged they were in receipt of the payment but claimed it was " impossible '' to remove the account from my name until this " processing '' was complete. 

In the meantime, this account is still listed as open on my credit report and I can not trust anything that this company tells me. The lies and inconsistencies are appalling and this is no way to treat a costumer. Five weeks ago, I traded in a vehicle and it has sense been sold to someone else. And yet I am still listed as the financially responsible party for that vehicle. This is unacceptable.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief