Consumer complaint received 2026-03-04 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Personal line of credit
Issue: Problem with the payoff process at the end of the loan — 
Company: Harpeth Financial Services, LLC
State: ID

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding a Flex Loan/Line of Credit issued by Advance Financial 24/7 . The lender refused to respond to the previous CFPB complaint # XXXX, which was submitted by my spouse, even though the issues involved my account. Because Advance Financial declined to participate solely due to who submitted the complaint, I am now filing directly under my own name. My concerns involve the structure of the loan, the way payments were applied, the fees charged, the duedate manipulation, and the final settlement amount of {$1800.00}, which I paid on XX/XX/XXXX without ever receiving a payoff statement explaining how that amount was calculated. 1. Negative amortization despite the contract stating otherwise My signed contract states that the minimum payment must be : no less than 3 % of principal per month, or no less than 1.5 % biweekly, or all unpaid interest, whichever is greater. It also states that payments must be applied to interest and then principal. Despite this, every statement for years shows : Interest charged : {$180.00} Principal paid : {$0.00} Required principal reduction : {$0.00} My principal balance never decreased and instead increased from the original {$1200.00} to over {$1600.00}, even though I made consistent payments. This is negative amortization and violates the contracts minimum payment formula. 2. Multiple late fees and NSF fees were charged even though the account was current, payments were made on time, and the account was paid off before the next due date Advance Financial repeatedly charged late fees and other fees during billing cycles where my statements clearly showed Past Due Amount : {$0.00} and where payments were made on time or early. For example, they charged a late fee on XX/XX/year> even though the payment was not due until XX/XX/XXXX, and the payment was actually received on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX day early. Despite the account being current, they continued to add additional fees within the same billing cycle. They then charged another late fee and an NSF fee in early XXXX, even though the account still showed no pastdue amount. Most concerning, they processed a late fee on XX/XX/XXXX for the period between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, even though I paid the entire payoff amount on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX days before the next scheduled due date of XX/XX/XXXX. This means they charged a late fee for a period in which the account was already paid in full. These fees were assessed even though : the account was not past due, payments were made on time or early, the billing statements showed no pastdue amount, the account was paid off before the next due date, and no missed payments occurred. This pattern of charging multiple late fees and multiple cycle fees while the account was current and even after payoff violates the contracts latefee rules, which only allow a late fee 10 days after the due date, and contradicts the information shown on the official billing statements. It reflects improper fee stacking, inaccurate servicing, and abusive billing practices. XXXX. Settlement amount of {$1800.00} exceeded the original amount borrowed On XX/XX/XXXX, I paid {$1800.00} to close the account. I never received a payoff statement explaining how this amount was calculated. This payoff amount is higher than the original principal, even after years of payments. This is the direct result of : negative amortization improper fees failure to apply payments to principal duedate manipulation interest charges that contradict the contract This is not a lawful or transparent payoff process. 4. The EFT Authorization does NOT amend the contract The lender included a line in the electronic payment authorization stating they could debit the amount owed under the contract or a lesser amount. This is not a contract amendment and does not override : the minimum payment formula the requirement to reduce principal the prohibition on negative amortization the duedate rules the latefee rules The EFT authorization is only permission to pull money electronically. It does not change the terms of the loan agreement. 5. How the principal increased despite paying every fee and every payment Throughout the entire loan, I paid : every minimum payment they required every fee they added every interest charge every NSF fee every late fee they assessed I never borrowed additional funds, and I never missed a payment. Despite paying 100 % of everything they charged, the principal still increased. This should have been mathematically impossible under the contract, because the contract requires a portion of every payment to reduce principal ( 1.5 % biweekly or 3 % monthly ). However, Advance Financial : set my minimum payment equal to interest only, not interest + principal applied {$0.00} of every payment to principal added fees to the balance charged interest on those fees charged interest on interest ignored the required principalreduction formula Because they violated the contracts payment structure, the loan was designed so that no matter how faithfully I paid, the principal could never go down and would instead increase over time. This is the definition of negative amortization, and it was never disclosed, never authorized, and directly contradicts the written contract. 6. Loan treated as an ongoing line of credit without clear consent I did not knowingly request or intend to open a revolving line of credit with no end date. I believed I was taking out a loan that would be paid down over time. Instead, the lender treated it as an openended credit product with daily interest accrual and no realistic path to principal reduction. 7. Request for refund of all amounts paid above the original principal Because Advance Financial : failed to follow the contracts minimum payment formula created negative amortization charged improper late fees and NSF fees charged a late fee before the due date manipulated due dates increased principal instead of reducing it demanded a payoff of {$1800.00} without explanation refused to respond to CFPB complaint # XXXX I am requesting a full review and refund of all amounts paid above the original amount borrowed. The lender did not uphold their contractual obligations, and the payoff amount was inflated by improper interest and fees. Requested Resolution I am requesting that the CFPB or Idaho Department of Finance review : the lenders failure to follow the contracts paymentapplication formula the negative amortization that caused the balance to grow the improper late fees and NSF fees charged despite timely payments the late fee charged before the due date the settlement amount of {$1800.00} that exceeded the original loan the lenders refusal to respond to CFPB complaint # XXXX the mischaracterization of the loan as an ongoing line of credit the total amount paid above the original principal, for refund I am requesting confirmation that the account is permanently closed, that no further fees or charges will be added, and that improper interest and fees be reviewed for refund.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation