Consumer complaint received 2025-11-28 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Problem with fees charged
Company: HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, THE
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
SYSTEMATIC PREDATORY LENDING SCHEME - TWO IDENTICAL VEHICLES VEHICLE 1 - HUNTINGTON BANK LOAN : VIN : XXXX Vehicle : 2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Verified Retail Value : {$28000.00} Amount Financed by Huntington Bank : {$44000.00} Markup Over Fair Market Value : {$16000.00} ( 59 % above market ) APR : 9.89 % Term : 75 months Monthly Payment : {$800.00} Finance Charge : {$15000.00} Total of Payments : {$60000.00} Total Overpayment ( Principal + Interest ) : Approximately {$32000.00} VEHICLE 2 - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : VIN : XXXX Vehicle : 2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( IDENTICAL MODEL ) XXXX XXXX Verified Retail Value : {$28000.00} Amount Financed by XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$46000.00} Markup Over Fair Market Value : {$17000.00} ( 63 % above market ) APR : 8.5 % Term : 78 months Total Overpayment : Approximately {$32000.00} COMBINED FRAUD TOTALS : Total Fair Market Value ( Both Vehicles ) : {$56000.00} Total Amount Financed ( Both Loans ) : {$91000.00} Total Fraudulent Markup : {$34000.00} Total Consumer Overpayment : {$64000.00} EVIDENCE OF SYSTEMATIC FRAUD : This is not an isolated incident but a coordinated predatory lending scheme involving XXXX XXXX XXXX ( dealer in XXXX XXXX, GA ) and two separate lenders who both approved grossly inflated vehicle valuations. 

Pattern Evidence :- Same dealership sold both vehicles - Identical vehicle make, model, year, and trim level- Same verified retail value ( {$28000.00} each per XXXX XXXX ) - Nearly identical markup percentages ( 59 % and 63 % ) - Two different lenders both approved inflated collateral values- Both loans originated approximately same timeframe This pattern demonstrates systematic dealer fraud enabled by lender negligence or complicity. 

LEGAL VIOLATIONS : 1. Truth in Lending Act ( 15 USC 1631 ) Huntington Bank financed {$44000.00} on collateral worth {$28000.00}. When the financed amount is inflated 59 % above actual collateral value, all TILA disclosures are materially false and misleading. The finance charge and total of payments are calculated on fraudulent principal amount. 

2. Georgia Fair Business Practices Act ( O.C.G.A. 10-1-393 ) Approving financing based on grossly inflated collateral value constitutes unfair and deceptive practice causing substantial consumer harm. The 59 % markup is unconscionable and violates Georgia consumer protection standards. 

3. Federal UDAP Standards ( 12 USC 5531, 5536 ) This practice causes substantial injury to consumers that is not reasonably avoidable and not outweighed by countervailing benefits. A 59 % markup on vehicle financing meets the definition of unfair practice under federal law. 

FORMAL LEGAL DEMAND SENT AND IGNORED : On XX/XX/year>, I sent Huntington Bank a certified legal demand letter via US Postal Service to : Huntington Bank XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX The letter detailed the above violations and demanded : - Permanent deletion of tradeline from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Written confirmation of deletion - 30-day deadline to respond Huntington Bank received this certified letter ( USPS tracking confirmation available ) and has failed to respond for over 30 days, in violation of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act requirements to validate disputed debt. 


I have excellent credit management history as evidenced by my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card account in good standing with {$3500.00} limit. The only negative items on my credit reports are these two fraudulent auto loans from XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

I stopped making payments in XX/XX/year> when I discovered the extent of the fraud through independent XXXX XXXX appraisals showing both vehicles worth {$28000.00} each. 

1. Immediate investigation of Huntington Bank 's auto lending practices, specifically approval of loans exceeding 150 % of collateral value 2. Investigation of relationship between Huntington Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX to determine if kickback arrangements exist XXXX. Loan cancellation or reduction to actual fair market value ( {$28000.00} ) 4. Permanent deletion of all negative credit reporting related to this fraudulent loan 5. Refund of all payments made on the fraudulent markup portion ( {$16000.00} principal portion ) 6. Compensatory damages for credit harm, emotional distress, and time spent addressing this fraud 7. Investigation into whether other consumers have been victimized by similar scheme with this dealer and lender 8. Enforcement action against Huntington Bank for approving grossly inflated auto loans 9. Required implementation of collateral verification procedures to prevent future fraud I have filed identical complaints regarding the second vehicle with XXXX XXXX XXXX, and have filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission and Georgia XXXX XXXX naming all parties involved in this scheme. 

This is systematic predatory lending requiring immediate regulatory intervention to prevent continued consumer harm.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation