Consumer complaint received 2026-01-22 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Problem with the payoff process at the end of the loan — 
Company: ACIMA CREDIT, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I do not believe that Acimas active, time-proximate payment communications clearly and conspicuously disclose material information about the timing and financial consequences of my First Early Purchase Option ( FEPO ) at the moment those decisions were most relevant.

Acima asserts that it is solely the consumers responsibility to monitor the portal and recall contract terms disclosed at signing, consumer protection standards do not permit a covered person to rely exclusively on prior disclosures when subsequent communications actively encourage continued payment behavior while omitting material, time-sensitive information. As reflected in Acimas own emails, payment reminders emphasized autopay status, upcoming payment dates, and continued payment obligations, while failing to provide a clear expiration date, explain the loss of a substantially lower purchase price, or disclose the existence and limited duration of any extension window. In this context, a general reference to days remaining without clear consequences does not constitute meaningful
notice. 

Acima further claims that a reminder email regarding the FEPO deadline was sent and that my XX/XX/year> inquiry was fully addressed. To date, no documentary evidence has been produced to substantiate these assertions. If Acima maintains these positions, it should provide contemporaneous records demonstrating compliance, including : ( 1 ) copies of any FEPO reminder email ( s ) with full content, date and time sent, and delivery confirmation ; and ( 2 ) complete chat transcripts from XX/XX/year>, including accurate timestamps showing when my inquiry was received, when the agent responded, and when any substantive guidance regarding purchase options or deadlines was provided. Without such documentation, Acimas statements remain conclusory.

Acima also states that all customers are treated fairly and equally. Equal access to a portal or standardized contract language, however, does not address whether consumers are given equal and meaningful notice of cost-saving options before those options expire, particularly where extensions are discretionary and time-limited. The selective or delayed disclosure of such information, when paired with payment-driven communications, may create an informational imbalance that disadvantages consumers. 

For these reasons, I continue to dispute Acima Leasings position and request that this matter remain open for further review. I am disputing whether Acima met its obligation to clearly and conspicuously disclose material, time-sensitive information in a manner consistent with federal consumer protection standards. The omission of such information in active payment communications raises concerns under 1031 and 1036 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536 ), which prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices, including the omission of material facts necessary to prevent consumer harm.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation