Consumer complaint received 2026-05-04 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Problem when making payments — 
Company: CHERRY TECHNOLOGIES INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding a Cherry financing loan tied to dental services that were incomplete, defective, and resulted in significant medical harm, as well as Cherrys inadequate handling of my dispute. In XX/XX/year>, I was directed by my then dentist to obtain {$10000.00} in financing through Cherry. The treatment associated with this loan did not address my primary medical condition ( active XXXX XXXX from XXXX that were XXXX and needed to be XXXX ), which worsened over several months. Between XX/XX/year> and XX/XX/year>, I experienced recurrent XXXX, XXXX XXXX and worsening XXXX, requiring multiple courses of XXXX and forcing me to miss personal and professional obligations due to severe XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. After discontinuing care, I required emergency treatment from a new dentist, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of two XXXX XXXX. My new dentist ordered me to call XXXX if pressure worsened at all, as my breathing was already impacted and any further progression of the XXXX would be an immediate risk to my life requiring emergency medical treatment to prevent me from XXXX and XXXX. During the XXXX, I was informed that the XXXX of one area had progressed to XXXX XXXX and involvement of my XXXX XXXX. In addition to the untreated XXXX, the XXXX XXXX placed under this financing are defective, as confirmed by the dentist who placed them during multiple conversations with his XXXX XXXX in my presence and as documented and evidenced by the email and text communication I received from the dentist and his office manager. I provided Cherry with this written documentation wherein the dentist repeated that he would revise the XXXX and the office manager provided me with contact information to continue consulting with the practice 's XXXX XXXX. The provider explicitly offered to redo the XXXX and pointed out specific design errors in my presence with the XXXX XXXX, confirming that the work financed was not completed properly and needed revision. Despite this evidence, Cherry denied my dispute, stating there was no indication that partial services were performed and that I failed to provide supporting evidence. This is inaccurate. The providers own written communications acknowledging defective work and the need for correction demonstrate that the financed services were incomplete and not properly rendered. Additionally, I submitted medical documentation confirming that I can not safely return to the original provider due to the progression of XXXX and need for continuity of care. This matter is also under review by the California XXXX XXXX, and the provider has since contacted me to discuss a potential refund. Despite these factors, Cherry denied the dispute without adequately addressing the evidence I provided and initiated frequent collection activity via phone and email while the matter remained contested, without even notifying me of their denial.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation