Consumer complaint received 2026-06-10 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Billing problem
Company: ALLY FINANCIAL INC.
State: NV

Complaint narrative:
Consumer information Complaint narrative This complaint concerns Ally Bank / Ally Autos continued collection and enforcement of an auto finance account after Ally had repeated and direct notice that the contract being enforced was disputed as unauthorized, altered, and fraudulent. Ally nevertheless continued to treat the account as valid even after receiving my written dispute, my fraud-related communications, my police report, my contract documents, and later filing a lawsuit based on the same disputed contract records. I signed a paper contract at XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX for one set of terms, but later received a different contract for the same vehicle with changed terms and signatures that I disputed as not mine. The original contract I signed at the dealership was a three-part carbon paper form completed in pen, so the signatures bled through the copies. The later contract Ally relied on was a different printable form, not the carbon-paper form I signed, and I did not authorize or sign that later printable version. Allys own XX/XX/XXXX letter states that Ally was not agreeable to handling the proposed transaction as submitted and would only consider modified terms relayed to the dealer. That letter is important because it shows Ally knew the original transaction had not been approved as submitted. Even so, a later contract with changed terms was later treated as valid despite my dispute that the changed signatures and changed terms were unauthorized. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent Ally a written Notice of Billing Error disputing the account and explaining that the contract in Allys file contained signatures that were not mine and changes I did not authorize. In that letter I asked Ally to authenticate the signatures, pointing out that Allys XX/XX/XXXX letter referenced changes even though my paper contract was signed on XX/XX/XXXX, and requested cancellation of the transaction and return of the money I had paid. The XXXX Police Department report, which was filed on XX/XX/XXXX, states that I reported signing a paper sales contract showing one total cash price and later receiving an updated contract with different amounts and signatures that were not mine. The police report also states that I told the officer I specifically requested a paper contract and did not sign on a tablet because I did not want my signature reused on other forms. The report further states that the officer observed the updated contract showed a different total cash price and that some signatures did not look the same. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with Allys fraud department for about 30 minutes regarding the disputed and unauthorized contract. At approximately XXXX XXXX near the end of that call, I emailed the XXXX Police Department report to XXXX, and the sent-email proof appears in my records. Ally indicated that the matter would take time to investigate. After that, Ally continued collecting or attempting to collect payments on the vehicle even though the authenticity of the contract and signatures had been disputed and a police report had been provided. I then waited for Allys investigation, but I did not receive a meaningful written resolution or clear explanation of how Ally concluded that the disputed contract was valid. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with Ally again for about 30 minutes regarding the same fraud dispute. Near the end of that call, around XXXX XXXX, I sent Ally the contract in my possession to the same fraud email address, XXXX. Ally told me it would call me back, but I did not receive a meaningful follow-up call or written resolution. By that point, Ally had repeated notice of the dispute through multiple channels : Allys own XX/XX/XXXX denial / modified-terms letter, my XX/XX/XXXX written billing-error and fraud dispute, my XX/XX/XXXX fraud-department call and police-report email, and my XX/XX/XXXX call and contract email. Ally therefore can not fairly claim that it did not know the contract authenticity, signatures, and changed terms were being disputed. Ally later filed suit against me in XXXX XXXX, Nevada, alleging that I executed the disputed XX/XX/XXXX contract for a principal amount of {$43000.00} at 15.09 percent APR to finance the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and that Ally was the lawful holder of that contract by assignment. By the time Ally filed and verified that lawsuit, Ally had already received my XX/XX/XXXX written dispute, my XX/XX/XXXX fraud email with the police report, and my XX/XX/XXXX follow-up email with contract documents. The lawsuit also seeks possession of the vehicle, damages, and a money judgment of {$47000.00} based on that disputed contract. Ally went beyond ordinary collection activity by filing a verified complaint through an authorized representative, thereby formally relying on the disputed contract and related records despite my prior fraud notices and supporting documents. In addition, the contract attached as Exhibit A to Allys lawsuit appears to contain inconsistent buyer-identifying information while still using the same vehicle and financing details. That raises additional concerns that Ally relied on inaccurate, inconsistent, or unauthenticated contract records in pursuing collection and litigation. This complaint is not based on a misunderstanding or minor clerical issue. It concerns a disputed contract containing changed material terms and disputed signatures, a lender that had actual notice of those issues, and continued collection and enforcement despite that notice. At minimum, Allys conduct raises serious concerns about whether Ally reasonably investigated the fraud dispute, whether Ally relied on inaccurate or unauthenticated contract records, and whether Ally continued collection and litigation after receiving clear notice that the contract itself was disputed. I am not asking the CFPB to decide my entire court case. I am asking the CFPB to review Allys handling of this consumer dispute, including whether Ally ignored or failed to meaningfully address repeated notice of fraud and unauthorized contract changes while continuing to treat the account as valid and later filing suit on the same disputed records. Key supporting documents Ally adverse action / denial letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Billing Error letter to Ally. XXXX Police Department report and narrative. XX/XX/XXXX sent email to XXXX with the police report attached. XX/XX/XXXX sent email to XXXX with contract material. Ally lawsuit complaint, verification, and Exhibit A. Contract pages showing the written-change language and the disputed later contract versions.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation