Consumer complaint received 2025-04-08 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Auto debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: Southern Auto Finance Co
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
This complaint is in regard to the retail installment contract between a buyer ( consumer/me ) and a seller ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). SAFCO has no personal knowledge of the contract that they are trying to unlawfully enforce. I have personal knowledge as to what was signed not SAFCO. The alleged loan agreement is a copy, which is hearsay and is an altered loan document. Why I say it's a forged document because it was changed after I put my wet-ink signature on. My signature wasn't a digital signature but a wet-ink signature. There is a big difference between the two. The authenticity of the instrument is indeed in question! 


XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) states that a cash price at which the seller ( XXXX ), in the normal business of operations, offers to sell a property or service for immediate payment and it exclude any finance charges, interest, or other costs associated with credit or installment purchases. SAFCO admitted that they paid the seller for the vehicle, thereby creating an unlawful lien on my vehicle. In my findings it is unfound and there isn't a judgment lien or interest in my personal property in the State of Florida. The Uniform Commerical Code requires all security interests to be recorded and file with the Secretary of State of Florida. Pursuant to the U.C.C. 9-203 ( b ) ( 1 ) states that s security interest is enforceable against the debtor with respect to the collateral only if value has been given and ( 2 ) that the debtor has rights in the collateral. This alleged retail installment contract is not forceable. The purpose of the UCC is to simplify, clarify and modernize the law governing commercial transactions. The principles of law and equity, law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, bankruptcy, and other validating or invalidating cause supplement its provisions. SAFCO and the Seller are not operating in Good Faith. SAFCO is engaging in funny accounting similar to the XXXX XXXX because SAFCO is doing the opposite from what I understood the agreement to be. The seller misrepresented by false advertising that it would loan me their funds to obtain a vehicle, which I know that the seller or SAFCO ever gave any Consideration per the U.C.C. 3-303 ( b ) that stated the promise is usually exchanged for something of value ( cash ), from the other party ( the Promisee ) and to support a simple contract. My defense is that the instrument was issued without consideration. What is the primary function of this retail installment contract recitals?

16 CFR 433.1 ( f ) states that a Contract is any oral or written agreement, formal or informal, between a creditor and a seller. Where is the consumer?

16 CFR 433.1 ( d ) states that a Purchase money loan is a cash advance which is received by the consumer in return for a " Finance Charge '' within the meaning of the Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z, which was not disclosed to me in the agreement. Also, a finance charge is the fee or interest charged for the use of the loan document, meaning that the seller purposely assigned the retail installment agreement and retained all of their rights to receive a part of the finance charge ( PROFITS ). It makes sense and it evidence that the seller coercion the buyers to go through financing instead of paying cash arising in a transaction, so they can be able to gain profits and mislead vulnerable buyers. The seller had me under duress. This refers to a loan document or credit where the consumer receives a sum of money or its equivalent upfront, which the borrower then agree to repay. So, my question to SAFCO is where is the cash that I was supposed to receive? Why was this concealed from me? This constitutes fraud because I was induced to sign the instrument without knowledge reasonable opportunity to learn of its essential terms. This is another real defense and how I can bring suit to SAFCO for monetary damages.

Pursuant to U.C.C. 3-104 ( g ) states that a cashier 's check is a draft payable on demand and is drawn on a bank and is a bank liability, which is a direct obligation to the bank, lender/creditor that issues to borrowers to pay off any loan and are a secured way to make large payments, backed by the bank that is used in such transactions so that the borrower may then repay the loan document in full. Why wasn't this cashier 's check issued to me so I could fulfill the alleged obligation?

A retail installment loan is where the creditor provides a cashier 's check per the Uniform Commerical Code.

Example, if a dealership offers a car for {$25000.00} cash, that is the cash price. If they also offer financing, the cash price would still be {$25000.00}, even if the financed price is higher. F.Y.I. the cash price does not include any interest or finance charges associated with installment plans or credit agreement. This is the reason why cash price is used in consumer credit laws and regulations to ensure transparency and prevent deceptive practices. This helps the consumers to understand the true cost of a purchase when they are considering financing options. Therefore, I did not have such opportunity. It was concealed from me. This is the main reasons why dealerships encourage consumers to finance an auto, because they earn additional profits from the interest and fees associated with auto loans. This is a very deceptive, loan shark practice.

SAFCO and the Seller breached the agreement first. This is also a misrepresentation of material facts and SAFCO failed to perform their obligations under the contract.

Pursuant to the U.C.C. 3-103 ( 12 ) states that an I.O.U. that only acknowledge a debt but doesn't include a promise to pay is not a negotiable instrument, whereas a promissory note, which does not contain a promise to pay, is a negotiable instrument.

Geiger Finance Co. v. Graham : The Supreme Court held that a retail installment contract was not a negotiable instrument, and therefore the assignee ( the finance company ) was not a holder in due course, meaning they could not take the contract free of the buyer 's defenses.

A holder in due course is one who takes a negotiable instrument in good faith, for value and without notice of any claim or defense against it.

SAFCO stated in their last response that they are not a bank regulated by the Federal Reserve Bank and is a private finance company. If any private finance company accepts floating rate notes from their customers directly or indirectly are subject to the Federal Reserve Bank 's monetary policies.

Finally, it is evidence that SAFCO is in the business of securitization unlawfully conversions with its customer 's retail installment contracts into securities which they claim is a common practice which is in fact that's its unlawful to do and to trade them on the open market without the borrower 's knowledge and consent. By doing this hideous act, it violates securities laws and ethical obligations. My wet-ink signature never agreed to such fraudulent acts, nor does it state in the retail installment contract that the Borrower gives SAFCO permission and consent to convert the retail installment contract in a security to be pooled with other securities to back other assets using the borrower 's pledged collateral. By doing this the contract becomes null and void and unenforceable. Since, the whole world is under the bankruptcy, borrowers are unable to pay any debt in lawful money. They only can discharge debts. In banking a debt discharge is the cancellation of a debt due to bankruptcy. When a debt is discharged, the debtor is no longer liable for the debt and the creditor is no longer allowed to make any attempts to collect the debt. Any debt over {$600.00} results in taxable income unless certain IRS conditions are met. I will send out a 1099C Form to cancel out this debt security. 18 U.S.C. 8 obligation or other security of the United States defined obligation or other security of the United States includes : bond, certificates of Indebtedness, national bank currency , federal reserve notes, and other similar instruments.

Pursuant to Florida Title XXXIX Chapter 679 " Promissory notes '' means an instrument that does not evidence an order to pay, like a check. A check is an order to pay me.

Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1813 ( I ) ( 1 ) states that once promissory notes are deposited, it becomes money or its equivalent. I've asked multiple times and asked SAFCO to explain to be the material facts that was not disclosed to me by the seller nor SAFCO. I tried to learn the facts of the agreement and they refused to explain, which constitutes a breach of agreement through concealing material facts. How is it possible and you claimed that you loan me money. Then, I have to pay back interest on top of the principal. How is that possible if you claim you loan a certain sum amount, which is in circulation. The interest isn't even in circulation, it doesn't even exist, so how am I able to fulfill the obligation? That means I will need to come back to you to get more money just to pay off the interest. That's stupid.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation