Consumer complaint received 2025-05-16 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold
Company: FC HoldCo LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
This is in response to XXXX XXXX XXXX handling of my auto loan and the resulting {$19000.00} deficiency balance, which I strongly dispute. I am requesting a full reinvestigation and proper resolution. 

I made over {$20000.00} in payments on a {$27000.00} auto loan before the vehicle was repossessed in XX/XX/XXXX. The vehicle was sold on XX/XX/XXXX, for {$7600.00}, yet XXXX is now claiming I owe nearly {$20000.00} more. Their balance calculation is vague, excessive, and was not properly documented or explained until I had to go through the CFPB. This raises serious concerns under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and FDCPA. 

More importantly, they are reporting this account as a charge-off, not a repossession. This is extremely misleading. It gives the false impression that I still have the vehicle and am refusing to pay, when in fact XXXX repossessed the vehicle and sold it. This inaccurate reporting severely damages my credit profile and creates a false narrative about the nature of this account. It appears as though they are inflating the perception of unpaid debt. 

In addition, my credit report shows conflicting balances {$25000.00} in XX/XX/XXXX, and {$19000.00} in XX/XX/XXXX without proper explanation. This inconsistency further supports my concern that their reporting is neither accurate nor fair. 

I also want it noted that despite my multiple attempts to obtain validation directly from the company, I only received the breakdown after escalating this matter through the CFPB. This clearly shows they did not validate the debt prior to verifying it with credit bureaus. 
Additionally, I find it unnecessary and frankly insulting that XXXX continues to emphasize that I was late on payments a fact that is self-evident, considering the vehicle was repossessed. This detail is not in dispute and has no bearing on my current request, which is for proper documentation and accurate reporting. Rather than addressing my valid concerns, such as the missing and incomplete bill of sale and the inconsistent balance reporting, they are deflecting from the core issue. 

It wasnt until I escalated this matter through the CFPB that I finally received documents that should have been provided up front and even then, the bill of sale was still problematic. For example, the vehicle sale lists an unknown mileage and fails to clearly show whether the sale was conducted in a commercially reasonable manner, as required by law. These are critical details, and the continued failure to properly validate them only strengthens my position that this debt is being mishandled. 

The attached screenshots show that XXXX only recently began updating my account to reflect a pattern of late payments which, according to your own prior reporting, were previously sporadic and not consistently marked. This raises the question : was I frequently late, or is this sudden reporting shift an attempt to retroactively justify your position because you still havent provided the legal documentation Ive repeatedly requested? 


To further illustrate my concerns, Ive attached a screenshot showing that XXXX only recently altered my payment history retroactively marking months as late that were previously listed as current or unknown. This sudden shift in reporting occurred after I filed my CFPB complaint, which makes it appear retaliatory or as an attempt to align their records with their current position. If I was truly frequently late, as they now claim, why was that not reflected in their original reporting? The inconsistency is not only suspicious, but it undermines the credibility of their response and suggests they may not have had accurate or complete records until forced to respond through this formal complaint process. 

This raises the question : was I frequently late, or is this sudden reporting shift an attempt to retroactively justify your position because you still havent provided the legal documentation Ive repeatedly requested? Or did you all mostly receive consistent payments until my health crisis?

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation