Consumer complaint received 2026-04-19 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: Lendmark Financial Services
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I. Overview I am filing this formal complaint against Lendmark Financial Services for multiple violations including failure to respond to a formal conditional acceptance and dispute letter within the required timeframe, reliance on a promissory note as sole and insufficient verification of the debt, failure to address specific conditions formally requested, failure to conduct a reasonable investigation, and continued reporting of unverified disputed information to consumer reporting agencies in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. XXXX. Timeline of Events I submitted a formal Conditional Acceptance Letter to Lendmark Financial Services requiring complete verified documentation within the required timeframe Lendmark responded by producing a promissory note as their sole verification of the debt I submitted a formal rejection of that response identifying it as legally insufficient and raising XXXX additional conditions triggered by their promissory note response Lendmark has failed to respond to my rejection and outstanding conditions within any reasonable timeframe Lendmark continues to report this account to consumer reporting agencies while the dispute remains open and unresolved To date Lendmark has ignored key conditions formally raised including proof of actual consideration, chain of title, monetization of the promissory note, and sworn verification XXXX. Specific Violations Violation XXXX Promissory Note Is Legally Insufficient Verification Lendmark Financial Services responded to my formal conditional acceptance and dispute by producing a promissory note as complete verification of the debt. This response is legally insufficient on the following grounds : The promissory note confirms only that a document bearing a signature exists. It does not establish or verify : That actual lawful money not credit created from my signature was transferred to me from XXXX existing assets That Lendmark is the current holder in due course of this instrument That the promissory note was not monetized, sold, securitized, or transferred to any XXXX XXXX That the balance currently claimed is accurately calculated with a complete verified ledger That all required Truth in Lending Act disclosures were made prior to execution That no XXXX XXXX compensation including insurance or securitization proceeds has been received Producing a promissory note while ignoring every other condition formally requested does not constitute valid verification of the debt or satisfaction of FCRA furnisher obligations. Violation XXXX Failure to Prove Actual Consideration My formal dispute required Lendmark to provide verified documentation that actual pre-existing money not credit created from my promissory note or signature was disbursed to me. Lendmark has never addressed this condition. This is a foundational requirement for establishing a valid enforceable debt obligation and XXXX continued silence on this point is legally significant. Violation XXXX Failure to Establish Chain of Title and Holder in Due Course Status Lendmark has never produced documentation establishing complete chain of title from origination to present or confirming their current status as holder in due course of this instrument. Without this documentation Lendmark can not establish legal standing to collect or report this account. Violation XXXX Failure to Address Promissory Note Monetization My formal rejection letter specifically demanded confirmation that the promissory note was not deposited, sold, transferred, securitized, or otherwise monetized after execution. Lendmark has never addressed this demand. If the promissory note was monetized and Lendmark received compensation for it then Lendmark may have already been paid and has no lawful basis to collect additionally from me. XXXX silence on this point is a critical gap in their claimed verification. Violation XXXX Failure to Provide Sworn Verification My formal dispute required a notarized affidavit signed under penalty of perjury by an authorized XXXX of Lendmark Financial Services with direct firsthand knowledge of this account verifying all claimed information. Lendmark has never produced this. A promissory note is not sworn verification. A form letter is not sworn verification. XXXX Lendmark has produced constitutes sworn verified documentation of the debt as claimed. Violation XXXX Failure to Respond Within Required Timeframe My formal rejection of XXXX promissory note response required a complete substantive response within XXXX days. That deadline has passed. Lendmark has not responded. This silence constitutes : Default on their dispute obligations Admission that the outstanding conditions can not be satisfied Admission that the documentation requested does not exist or does not support their position Violation XXXX FCRA XXXX XXXX Lendmark Financial Services is reporting this account to consumer reporting agencies. As a furnisher under the Fair Credit Reporting Act Lendmark is required under : FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) To report only accurate verified information FCRA XXXX ( b ) To conduct a genuine reasonable investigation upon receiving dispute notice and report verified results Lendmark has done neither. They have responded with a legally insufficient promissory note, ignored multiple specific conditions, failed to respond to my formal rejection, and continued reporting unverified disputed information. Each monthly reporting cycle of unverified disputed information constitutes a separate FCRA violation under XXXX carrying statutory damages of {$100.00} to {$1000.00} per violation. Violation XXXX Truth in Lending Act Noncompliance Lendmark has never produced documentation confirming that all required disclosures under the Truth in Lending Act 15 U.S.C. 1601 were made prior to execution of this loan agreement including finance charge disclosure, APR disclosure, total of payments disclosure, and payment schedule disclosure. TILA compliance is a foundational requirement for an enforceable consumer loan obligation. IV. Conditions That Remain Completely Unaddressed The following conditions from my formal dispute and rejection letter remain outstanding and unresolved : XXXX. Verified documentation that actual pre-existing money was disbursed not credit created from my promissory note XXXX. Complete chain of title from origination to present confirming current holder in due course status XXXX. Confirmation that the promissory note was not monetized, sold, or securitized XXXX. Confirmation that no third party compensation has been received on this account XXXX. Complete account ledger from origination to present showing every transaction charge and balance calculation XXXX. Certified copy of promissory note with chain of custody documentation XXXX. TILA disclosure compliance documentation XXXX. Notarized affidavit signed under penalty of perjury by authorized XXXX with firsthand knowledge verifying all of the above XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Lendmark Financial Services has engaged in a clear pattern of noncompliance : Responded to a comprehensive formal dispute with a single document a promissory note Ignored every specific condition formally requested beyond producing that document Failed to respond at all to my formal rejection identifying the promissory note as insufficient Continued reporting unverified disputed information to consumer reporting agencies Never produced sworn verified documentation of any kind This pattern demonstrates willful disregard for consumer dispute rights and furnisher obligations under federal law. VI. Harm Suffered Unverified debt being actively reported and potentially collected Ongoing damage to credit profile from continued unverified reporting Reduced access to credit and financial products Concrete ongoing financial harm XXXX and resources expended pursuing a dispute that Lendmark refuses to properly address Each monthly reporting cycle compounding harm and multiplying statutory violations

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation