Consumer complaint received 09-07-2015 about Consumer Loan (Title loan) with TMX Finance LLC (CA).
Issue: Charged fees or interest I didn't expect

Complaint: On XXXX/XXXX/2015 I visited the TitleMax office XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX and I got an auto title loan for {$2600.00}. I signed the " California Loan Agreement, Promissory Note and Security Agreement '' attached as " titlemax loan XXXX '', surrendered my auto title, and I got a check in the amount of {$2600.00}. I was told the loan is a fully amortizing loan, and that I had approximately {$1100.00} in available credit. XXXX and XXXX were the employees that assisted me. I was told I had to hand deliver my XXXX payments to their office at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. On XXXX/XXXX/2015 I drove to their offices and made my XXXX payment for {$320.00}. The payment receipt is attached in the file " payment receipts.pdf '' I noticed that the principal balance had increased to {$2600.00} and nothing was applied towards the principal balance from my payment. I called the office and requested an amortization schedule and the attached " XXXX XXXX Loan amortization schedule.xlsx '' was emailed to me. Apparently, the had illegally added the admin fee of {$75.00} onto the principal amount financed and used an APR of 143.88 % to calculate a payment amount of {$320.00}. The disclosed amount financed on the Federal TIL was {$2600.00} and the APR XXXX. I told them that they had violated the Truth-in-Lending disclosure. They said the APR of 143.88 % was the " State '' APR which is calculated differently than the Federal APR. I told them that was nonsense, as the number of days used to calculate the APR is the same in every state, there is no such term as a state APR and that the federal disclosure would supersede any state disclosure regardless. They told me that they would forward my concern to corporate. Nothing was ever adjusted. On XXXX/XXXX/2015 I made my XXXX payment of {$320.00} and asked to receive {$1100.00} from my remaining credit available. To loan me the amount of {$1100.00} they created a new loan contract with an amount financed of {$3700.00}, an APR of 134 %. They gave me a check for {$1100.00} and applied {$2600.00} towards the outstanding balance of the XXXX loan to pay it off. The XXXX contract is attached as " titlemax loan XXXX ''. The California Finance Lender 's law allows payday lenders like Titlemax to charge an exorbitant interest rate such as 134 % only for loan amounts above {$2500.00}. Titlemax should have loaned me the {$1100.00} at a rate capped by California 's usury law. Instead, in order to charge me 134 % for the {$1100.00} they created a new loan for {$3700.00}, which included the admin fee in from the first loan in the amount financed, a rate of 134 % and a term of 4 yrs. The new payment amount was {$420.00}. On XXXX/XXXX/2015, I made a payment for {$420.00}. Once again nothing XXXX {$0.00} XXXX was applied towards principle. On XXXX/XXXX/2015 I visited their offices. I was considering paying off the loan. I asked them to give me the original wet-ink promissory note from the XXXX loan, marked as " PAID OFF ''. They refused. They told me that they would return it to me only once the XXXX loan was paid off, and that the first loan was still part of the XXXX loan, even though when they funded the XXXX XXXX they withheld {$2600.00} to pay off the XXXX loan. XXXX See Amount paid on your account XXXX : {$2600.00} under itemization of amount financed in the XXXX loan contract ). 
I asked them for a complete accounting showing how the carryover interest was calculated, and they refused to provide me with one. Apparently interest is compounded on a daily basis, not monthly. I asked them whether there was a reply from corporate regarding the {$75.00} admin fee, which had been added onto the principal and financed and the response was that they would apply a flat credit for XXXX only if I paid off the loan that day. Given the circumstances, I decided not to pay off the loan. Instead I made a {$500.00} payment towards my XXXX payment. I went to

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation