Consumer complaint received 2025-08-14 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Title loan
Issue: Was approved for a loan, but didn't receive money — 
Company: CCF Intermediate Holdings LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
b'STATEMENT OF FACTS\n\n1. Background\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX, I entered into an original loan agreement and accompanying Credit Services Agreement (CSA) with TitleMax of XXXX, XXXX. and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX The loan was stated at an APR of 200.98%.\n\n2. CSO Fee & True APR\nThe CSA imposed a $XXXX  Credit Services Organization fee as the first payment, followed by additional CSO payments of $XXXX each, all omitted from the stated finance charge and APR in the loan agreement. This omission materially understated the true APR, whichwhen properly calculatedbecomes grossly unconscionable, in direct violation of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq., and Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. 1026.\n\n3. Refinance Transaction\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX  the lender disbursed $XXXX to XXXX XXXX XXXX amount sufficient to satisfy the original loan in full. On that same date, however, a refinance was initiated for $XXXXthe same principal amount as in the original loanplus additional payments and fees, while I was also required to pay over $XXXX that day. There was no lawful need to refinance; the prior loan should have been extinguished by the $XXXX  disbursement.\n\n4. Consent Orders in Force\nTMX Finance LLC, the parent company of TitleMax, is bound by two still-active CFPB Consent Orders:XXXX XXXX  CFPB Consent Order (active until XXXX XXXX\n- XXXX  CFPB Consent Order (active until XXXX XXXX)\nThese orders address the same type of deceptive lending and misrepresentation present in my case.\n\n5. Misrepresentation of Promissory Note\nThe respondents failed to disclose that my signed promissory note is a cash-equivalent asset under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), making me the true creditor and entitlement holder, with them as debtor in substance.\n\n6. Conversion & Securitization\nThe promissory note was taken as value, monetized, and potentially securitized. Additionally, the title to my XXXX XXXX XXXX (VIN: XXXX) could be treated as collateral for securitization without my consent, amounting to unlawful conversion of my property.\n\n7. Use of Social Security Number as a Credit Device\nUnder the Uniform Commercial Code, credit card means any card, plate, coupon book, or other single credit device used to obtain goods or services on credit. My Social Security Number functions as such a device, enabling the extension of consumer credit. I provided this number, allowing the defendants to access my credit, yet they demand repayment in Federal Reserve notes, amounting to the conversion of my credit into their cash.\n\n8. Rescission Notice Ignored\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX, I verbally notified TitleMax of my contract rescission. A notarized rescission notice was mailed via certified mail (tracking #XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX) and delivered to their principal office in XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX XXXX. An unsigned copy was also emailed to their legal department on XXXX XXXX XXXX. To this day, they have not rebutted my rescission, making it effective as a matter of law.\n\n9. Prior Complaint Mishandled\nIn my prior CFPB complaint, I submitted proof of my rescission and supporting documentation. The CFPB closed that complaint without requiring the respondents to produce any documentation. Regulators have a duty to enforce; closing cases without proof undermines that duty. I now expressly demand that any regulator handling this complaint require full proof of claim, including accounting ledgers, chain of title, and evidence of any consideration they claim to have provided.\n\nLEGAL ARGUMENTS\n\n1. TILA & Regulation Z Violations\nThe omission of the CSO fee from the finance charge and APR is a material disclosure violation under TILA and Regulation Z, triggering extended rescission rights.\n\n2. Breach of Active Consent Orders\nBy engaging in conduct prohibited by the active XXXX  and XXXX  CFPB Consent Orders, TMX Finance LLC and its subsidiaries are in breach of federal enforcement actions. Regulators have a sworn duty to enforce these orders for the protection of consumers.\n\n3. Conversion of Property & Unjust Enrichment\nThe defendants converted my promissory notean asset I providedinto their own cash benefit and potentially securitized my vehicle title, without returning equivalent value to me. This constitutes conversion and unjust enrichment.\n\n4. Failure to Provide Proof of Claim\nAs an American woman, I have the right to demand proof of claim. If any value or consideration came from them to end this dispute, they must prove it. To date, they have failed to produce any accounting or evidence, indicating that no lawful consideration was ever provided.\n\n5. Misuse of Social Security Number as a Credit Device\nMy Social Security Number, functioning as a credit card under UCC definitions, was used to obtain value on credit. Demanding repayment in Federal Reserve notes while retaining the value of my credit constitutes conversion.\n\n6. Public Trust & Duty to Enforce\nRegulators exist to protect consumers, not to shield multi-billion-dollar corporations engaging in dishonor. Failure to act on clear evidence of misconduct undermines public trust and leaves Americans vulnerable to systemic financial exploitation.\n\nRELIEF REQUESTED\n\nI respectfully request that the reviewing regulatory authority:\n\n1. Enforce the Active CFPB Consent Orders against TMX Finance LLC, TitleMax of XXXX, Inc., and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, including all penalties and remedies available.\n\n2. Require the Respondents to produce full proof of claim, including:\n   - The complete accounting ledger from inception to present.\n   - Chain of title for the promissory note.\n   - Documentation of any consideration they claim to have provided.\n   - All securitization or credit enhancement records involving my note or vehicle title.\n\n3. Declare the contracts null and void based on material misrepresentation, nondisclosure, and conversion of my property.\n\n4. Ensure that no adverse action is taken against me or my property, including my XXXX XXXX XXXX (VIN: XXXX), due to the rescinded agreements.\n\n5. Refer this matter for enforcement action to appropriate federal and state authorities to prevent further harm to consumers.\n\nCLOSING STATEMENT\n\nThis matter goes beyond my personal harmit strikes at the very heart of consumer protection and the publics trust in regulatory enforcement. TMX Finance LLC is a multi-billion-dollar corporation. There is no path to such wealth in the lending industry without dishonor when contracts are built on deception, misrepresentation, and conversion. Regulators have sworn an oath to protect the public from precisely this kind of exploitation.\n\nIf the agencies tasked with enforcement fail to act, they signal to corporations that consent orders and consumer protection laws are meaningless. As an American woman, I will hold every responsible party to their oath and duty. I stand ready to provide any documentation or evidence necessary. All I ask is that you uphold the law you are sworn to enforce.'

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation