Consumer complaint received 2025-09-27 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Confusing or misleading advertising or marketing
Company: Tesla, Inc.
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year>, I began the process of purchasing a new Tesla Model Y through Teslas XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, Arizona. Teslas official website prominently advertised ( and continues to advertise at the time of this filing ) a XXXX loan aXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX600.00} down, clearly presented as the available and qualifying promotional financing offer. 

I initiated my application fully expecting to qualify for these terms, as I held a XXXX XXXX above XXXX. However, over the course of just a few days, Tesla engaged in a classic bait-and-switch maneuver that materially harmed my credit, changed the financial terms mid-process, and attempted to pressure me into accepting a significantly worse loan package at the last minute. 

XXXX. Deceptive Change of Financing Terms Mid-Application Within XXXX hours of submitting my credit information through Teslas system, I noticed that the financing terms displayed in the Tesla app suddenly changed : XXXX increased from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  % Required down payment doubled from {$2600.00} to {$5100.00} Concerned, I immediately called XXXX at the XXXX XXXX dealership and texted Teslas main information line ( XXXX ) to clarify. XXXX assured me that because this purchase was XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Tesla staff would personally handle the loan with the lender. He explicitly said that the automated approval displayed in the app was only an initial step and not the final offer. 

Despite these assurances, after providing the requested LLC documentation and clarifying ownership, I was presented with a final offer at 7.49 % XXXX, requiring {$5100.00} down nearly double the advertised rate and on materially different terms than the promotional offer that induced me to apply in the first place.

2. Multiple Unauthorized Credit Pulls Causing Substantial Credit Damage Tesla pulled my credit three separate times within one week without my clear, informed authorization for multiple inquiries. These unnecessary, duplicative hard pulls caused my credit score to drop from over XXXX to XXXX in a matter of days. 

I did not receive any notice or consent that my credit would be hit three times for the same application. This is not only financially harmful, but also suggests a reckless and opaque lending process that penalizes the consumer for Teslas internal handling.

3. Pattern of Deceptive Marketing and High-Pressure Tactics Teslas actions appear to follow a deliberate sequence : 1. Advertise an attractive promotional loan rate ( 3.99 % ) to draw in qualified buyers.

2. Collect credit information early, damaging credit with multiple pulls.

3. Alter financing terms mid-application ( higher APR, higher down payment ), giving the consumer little recourse after credit damage has already occurred.

4. Provide a significantly worse loan offer ( 7.49 % APR ) at the final stage, likely banking on sunk-cost pressure ( time, damaged credit, emotional commitment ) to push the buyer to accept.

This behavior is misleading, deceptive, and financially harmful, especially because Tesla is vertically integrated and positions itself as both the advertiser and financing intermediary. Consumers have little ability to negotiate or seek clarity during this opaque process.

4. Requested Action I request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigate Tesla for : False and deceptive advertising of loan terms, in violation of Truth in Lending regulations.

Unauthorized and excessive credit inquiries causing demonstrable credit harm.

Bait-and-switch lending practices, where advertised promotional rates are not honored even for qualified applicants.

Potential systemic violations, as this appears not to be a one-off but a structured process.

This experience has caused me measurable financial harm ( credit score drop, worsened loan terms ), emotional stress, and wasted time. It is unacceptable for a company of Teslas size and sophistication to engage in what are, effectively, predatory and deceptive auto-financing practices.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation