Consumer complaint received 2025-08-13 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Pawn loan
Issue: Was approved for a loan, but didn't receive the money — 
Company: OneMain Finance Corporation
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/year>, I completed a loan application over the phone with a representative named XXXX at the XXXX branch. I provided the make and year of my vehicle and estimated the mileage to be between 190,000200,000 miles, as I was not physically near the car. Based on the information provided, XXXX informed me I was pre-approved for a {$10000.00} loan, which is the amount I requested. 

On XX/XX/year>, I went into the XXXX branch in person to finalize the loan. At that time, the branch manager, XXXX, told me that because I did not have a current paystub, she could not proceed until I received my next paycheck at the end of XXXX. I explained that I am a teacher, and historically, teachers do not receive pay during the summer months. I also mentioned that I have had previous loans with OneMain and expected similar treatment. I politely asked if my income could be verified by contacting my employer, but XXXX refused. During the conversation, XXXX became sarcastic and condescending, asking me, Do you not understand what Im saying? 

After leaving the XXXX branch, I contacted the XXXX XXXX branch to inquire about their policies. A representative there explained that teachers are an exception during the summer months, and that it is common policy across all OneMain locations to proceed with verification based on employment status alone when recent paystubs are unavailable. She encouraged me to file a complaint if XXXX refused to honor this. 

I then called the XXXX branch to request a transfer of my application to XXXX XXXX, citing my desire to work with another team. XXXX responded angrily, yelling at me for contacting another branch and for questioning her handling of the loan. I stated I no longer felt comfortable working with her and requested she transfer the application. She refused unless the XXXX XXXX branch called her directly. 

I then called OneMain Customer Service, who agreed to facilitate the transfer. Shortly after, I was contacted by XXXX from the XXXX branch, who said XXXX had approved the transfer. However, XXXX then repeated XXXX 's statement that recent paystubs were required, until I reminded him of the teacher exception policy. He then reviewed my case again and told me everything was in order and that I should upload the required documents. 

The next day, I went to the XXXX XXXX branch around XXXXXXXX XXXX., where I met XXXX in person. He took photos of my car and the odometer, which showed 243,363 miles a higher number than I originally estimated ( 190,000200,000 miles ). After this, XXXX told me that the approved loan amount was being reduced from {$10000.00} to {$3000.00}, allegedly due to the make and mileage of my vehicle. 

I asked what calculations is he doing to make the approved amount off by so much. I had already provided the year and make of the car during my original application, and it had not affected the original loan request and the mileage was not that significantly off either. I also believe this treatment could constitute discriminatory or biased behavior based on my employment status and attempts to exercise my rights. No laws that I believe work not adhered to include the following : -Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) 15 U.S. Code 1691 The ECOA prohibits lenders from discriminating against any applicant based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or because all or part of the applicant 's income comes from a public assistance program, or because the applicant has exercised any right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act. 

-Regulation B 12 CFR Part 1002 States that creditors must consistently apply standards for evaluating creditworthiness. 
Credit decisions must be based on accurate and complete information. 
It is unlawful to discourage an applicant from applying based on a prohibited basis. 
It is also unlawful to retaliate against an applicant for asserting their rights under ECOA.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation