Consumer complaint received 2025-03-27 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Lease
Issue: Struggling to pay your loan — Denied request to lower payments
Company: Mercedes Benz Financial Services
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I had put down a deposit for the car in XXXX of XXXX, when the car arrived in XXXX, due to supply chain issues, raised interest rates and secondhand car market, new car prices got inflated. I failed to do my homework at the time when I had to decide to execute the lease in XX/XX/XXXX as it relates to my rights as consumer. Had I known the effective APR of the lease, I would not have placed the order and paid the deposit. When the lease had to be signed, I wasnt given any information re my credit rating and APR of the lease. The monthly payment seemed very high, I was told over the phone financing would be even more expensive, and going with a lease is better. I wasnt provided any information as to what APR the proposed lease terms would result in. I was going to lose my deposit if I didnt go through with it. 
During XXXX I made XXXX phone calls to Mercedes Benz Financial ( MBF ) asking that my lease be reviewed and modified, to avoid my default or early termination. My reason was/still is financial hardship ( long term unemployment ). I was denied any other options than the standard deferral of 3 monthly payments. 
I visited the local dealership twice ( XXXX and XXXX ), meeting with a sales representative, asking for consideration and review of options to avoid default / early termination. I was given the pay off quotes at the time, and during the XXXX visit, it was explored to roll the negative equity into a new lease for an electric vehicle which is not selling well. But the financial burden would remain the same monthly and over the entire lease. 
I then informed the dealership that I will be returning the vehicle, which I did on XX/XX/XXXX. 
I received a notice in the mail dated XXXX which requested I pay XXXX $ XXXX. 
I received a second notice in my XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX for an amount of $ XXXX. 
I believe the XXXX notice takes into account the residual value of $ XXXX. 

I believe neither of these amounts take into account the higher of residual value ( future value in XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) of the car. I believe the XXXX is very likely higher than the residual value, based on sales listings of exact same car online, and XXXX 's XXXX XXXX. 

Both notices include the following information : XXXX. Payment within 10 days XXXX. XXXX is subject to change XXXX. Reference to the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act stating - " we may report information about your account to credit bureaus.... '' 4. Limited information to understand how the balance owed is calculated Further, in hindsight, after educating myself on the consumer rights, I realized that they didnt abide by : 1. 12 CFR 1026.18 ( e ) of the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) - they failed to disclose in any form or fashion, to the alleged consumer the APR of 20.4 % at the time of soliciting applicant to become bound by it ( I had to calculate the APR myself ) ; 2. failed to provide a Risk-Based Pricing Notice to the consumer as is required by the FCRA in the event the consumers credit rating was used to determine the APR 3. The notices received constitute violations of FDCPA because its misleading and unfair, and violates the 30 day right to dispute.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation