Consumer complaint received 2025-10-17 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Problems at the end of the loan or lease — Problem with paying off the loan
Company: HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, THE
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
THIS IS NOT A DUPLICATE Company : The Huntington National Bank Related prior CFPB case : XXXX My vehicle was a total loss on XX/XX/year>. My Retail Installment Sale Contract ( RISC ) includes XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ) for {$3700.00}, which is identified as part of the same contract. XXXX cancels any deficiency balance remaining after insurance is applied. Insurance & credits applied : XX/XX/year> Dealer warranty/service refund : {$3500.00}. XX/XX/year> ( applied XX/XX/year> ) XXXX XXXX total loss payment : {$21000.00}. After these credits, Huntingtons own records showed a small deficiency of {$1900.00}, which is the XXXX balance. -- - Servicing errors before and around payoff Huntingtons first Letter of Guarantee misnamed my insurer ( drisdol vest ) and later versions were rejected as non-compliant by XXXX and the insurer. While the account was under total loss review, Huntington sent Payment Not Received notices and assessed late fees as if the account were delinquent. On XX/XX/year>, Huntington waived {$51.00} in late fees, effectively admitting those charges were improper. XXXX could not be filed until insurance was applied, but Huntingtons own delays and incorrect payoff documentation prevented XXXX from processing the XXXX claim for months. -- - CFPB history & XXXX of follow-up Huntington responded to my prior CFPB complaint on XX/XX/year> ( signed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Customer Advocate Team Lead ) stating that I was responsible to keep payments current until the loan was paid in full. XX/XX/year> XXXX XXXX emailed me asking for XXXX contact information. I replied the same day, providing the requested information. I received no follow-up or acknowledgment. XX/XX/year> With no response from XXXX XXXX, I emailed XXXX ( cc XXXX XXXX ) with a formal dispute, explaining that instructing me to make payments on a XXXX  deficiency misrepresents my liability under the RISC. I also requested a single point of contact ( SPOC ) so my wife and I would stop receiving conflicting information from different departments. Neither XXXX XXXX nor the Credit Services Team responded. Meanwhile, Huntington representatives continued to tell my wife and me conflicting thingssome saying we were responsible for payments, others acknowledging XXXX coverage was activecreating unnecessary confusion and XXXX. XXXX XXXX Contract and XXXX clarification ( may ) Huntingtons own Letters of Guarantee state that a customer may be eligible for a waiver if they purchased XXXX coverage. The word may in this context is conditional, not discretionary. Eligibility depends only on whether the borrower : 1. Purchased XXXX, 2. The coverage is active, and 3. The claim was timely filed. All three conditions are met in my case. I purchased XXXX XXXX  as part of the RISC, the coverage is active, and the claim was timely filed after the insurance proceeds were posted. Therefore, Huntington can not use the word may to imply it has discretion to demand consumer payments on a balance that XXXX has contractually cancelled. Continuing to request payment misrepresents the contract and my liability. -- - Service contract refund already handled At various points, Huntington and XXXX staff confused the XXXX claim with the service contract refund. However, the dealer already refunded {$3500.00} on XX/XX/year>, and XXXX final calculation explicitly deducted that refund amount under Warranty Product refunds. XXXX XX/XX/year> letter confirms this and shows the full XXXX  math : Net balance at date of loss : {$27000.00} Including month-of-loss interest : {$130.00} Less warranty product refunds : - {$3500.00} Less net insurance settlement : - {$21000.00} Total XXXX  : {$2000.00} XXXX letter states this {$2000.00} payment to Huntington National Bank represents full and final reimbursement. Any remaining amount showing in Huntingtons system ( currently {$2500.00} ) is post-loss interest and fees that accrued while Huntington delayed processing and should be waived, not collected. -- - Recent developments XX/XX/year> Huntington assessed a new late fee of {$25.00} while XXXX was pending. XX/XX/year> XXXX issued a {$2000.00} check to Huntington National Bank as full and final reimbursement. Today : My Huntington portal shows {$2500.00} due, which appears to include post-loss interest and the new late fee, both of which arose solely from Huntingtons own delay and continued demand for payment. -- - Bottom line I paid for XXXX specifically to prevent this situation. Huntingtons mishandling, lack of communication, and contradictory instructions delayed the claim and caused extra fees. XXXX has now paid the deficiency in full, yet Huntington continues to show a balance, apply fees, and imply that I am responsible for payment. I am requesting that the CFPB step in to ensure Huntington honors the contract, reverses improper charges, and closes this account properly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief