Consumer complaint received 2025-10-16 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Confusing or misleading advertising or marketing
Company: CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
FORMAL CONSUMER COMPLAINT Submitted by : XXXX XXXX XXXX To Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Subject : Misleading and Deceptive Auto Financing Practices Credit Acceptance Corporation Summary of Complaint On XXXX, XX/XX/year>, I submitted a consumer credit application for a vehicle purchase at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, located in XXXX, XXXX  XXXX. 
The dealership informed me that Credit Acceptance Corporation ( CAC ) would be the financing lender responsible for reviewing and approving my credit application. 
Over the course of XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, I spoke with three representatives of CAC regarding the application. Two of these representatives confirmed that I was approved for financing and stated that CAC does not make decisions about down payments or interest rates. They told me those matters were decided by the dealership. 
When I requested a zero down payment and asked to discuss or negotiate the interest rate directly with CAC, I was told that those terms were controlled by the dealership even though CACs own algorithm appears to generate the lending decision and dictate the terms presented to the dealership. I personally observed that dealership staff could not adjust the down payment or interest rate through their system ; they could only change the length of the loan term. 
It became clear that both the dealership and CAC rely on an automated algorithm to decide financing terms, with no real individual review of the consumers financial situation. Despite this, I was told a down payment was required to proceed with the purchase. When I asked whether this was a legal requirement, no one could provide a clear answer. 
Statement of Concern There is no state or federal law requiring a consumer to make a down payment as a condition of vehicle financing. This appears to be a company policy, not a legal mandate. Representing to consumers that a down payment is required can easily mislead them into believing they have no choice, when in fact this is a discretionary or profit-driven practice. 
By making such representations, Credit Acceptance Corporation and XXXX XXXX XXXX are engaging in potentially deceptive and unfair business practices that mislead consumers about their financing rights and limit fair access to credit. These actions may violate : New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act ( N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 et seq. ), which prohibits unconscionable commercial practices, deception, fraud, false pretense, and misrepresentation. 
Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ), requiring lenders to clearly and accurately disclose financing terms and costs. 
Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. 
The dealerships and lenders reliance on algorithmic systems that deny consumers meaningful negotiation while concealing the true source of financing terms is inherently unfair and deceptive. Consumers are told that the dealership sets the rate, while the dealership has no real authority to change it. This practice removes transparency, inhibits informed consumer choice, and disproportionately benefits lenders and investors at the expense of borrowers. 
Consumer Harm As a result of these actions, I experienced confusion, financial distress, and a loss of fair negotiating opportunity. I was deprived of my right to understand and challenge how credit terms were determined and was pressured into believing a down payment was legally required when it was not. 
Respectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX

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