Consumer complaint received 2026-04-08 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Problems at the end of the loan or lease — Problem while selling or giving up the vehicle
Company: World Omni Financial Corp.
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
CFPB COMPLAINT INCOMPLETE INVESTIGATION, CONTRADICTORY RESPONSE, AND REFUSAL TO CORRECT OR FULLY REVIEW REPOSSESSION AND CREDIT REPORTING ISSUES I submit this complaint because Southeast Toyota Finance / World Omni Financial Corp. did not meaningfully investigate the issues raised and instead issued a conclusory XX/XX/year> response stating that it found no evidence of repossession-related communications during bankruptcy, had already updated reporting, and would take no further action on future disputes. That response is not an actual investigation. It is a refusal letter dressed up as one. In its XX/XX/year> CFPB response, the company made several key assertions : 1. It properly adhered to the Bankruptcy-related laws during the bankruptcy proceeding. 2. It found no evidence in its records that it communicated with or pressured me regarding repossession during the active bankruptcy period. 3. It claims it previously submitted updates to remove adverse credit marks. 4. It states it will not make changes or take further action regarding future disputes. 5. It claims the matter is fully resolved. Those assertions remain disputed and appear to be based on an incomplete review. First, the companys statement that there was no evidence of repossession-related contact during bankruptcy is not sufficient unless it specifically reviewed third-party vendor records, repossession assignment logs, call records, bankruptcy forwarding activity, recovery notes, dialer records, and any communications made by agents or contractors acting on its behalf. A company can not truthfully say there was no evidence if it only checked its own narrow internal notes and failed to review vendor or third-party records. That is not a negative finding. That is an incomplete investigation. Second, the companys response does not identify what records were actually reviewed. It does not say whether it reviewed : any repossession vendor assignments, third-party contractor communications, skip-trace records, outbound call logs, vendor account notes, bankruptcy communication restrictions applied to the account, or internal escalation records concerning the vehicle before payoff. Without that information, its conclusion is unsubstantiated. Third, the company attempts to avoid responsibility for the continuing credit reporting harm by stating that it furnished accurate information and does not control how consumer reporting agencies display the data. That is not a complete answer. If a furnisher knows its reporting has produced inaccurate, misleading, incomplete, or contradictory information across bureaus, it still has a duty to investigate disputes reasonably and correct or clarify what it furnished. Saying we sent something, blame the bureaus does not resolve whether the companys own furnishing, coding, timing, bankruptcy notation, payment status, or post-bankruptcy account characterization was inaccurate or misleading. Fourth, the companys declaration that it will not make further changes or take further action regarding future disputes is itself troubling because it suggests it has predetermined the outcome of disputes regardless of new evidence. That is not a good-faith dispute investigation process. It is a blanket shutdown position. The company must now answer the following specific questions : 1. What exact records did it review before stating there was no evidence of repossession-related contact during bankruptcy? 2. Did that review include third-party repossession vendors, agents, contractors, dialer systems, outbound call logs, and assignment history? 3. Did it review whether any person or entity acting on its behalf contacted me or attempted to direct me regarding repossession while the bankruptcy case was active? 4. What updates, exactly, were furnished to each consumer reporting agency, on what dates, and with what status codes or bankruptcy/account condition codes? 5. If the account was updated to paid in full/closed with zero balance, why has the dispute process not produced a full written explanation with supporting furnishing details and documentary verification? 6. On what basis does the company claim the matter is fully resolved while refusing further action and failing to describe the scope of its investigation? Requested relief : I request that CFPB require Southeast Toyota Finance / World Omni Financial Corp. to : 1. Conduct a documented reinvestigation that includes all internal and third-party vendor records, including repossession-related assignments, communications, call logs, dialer history, and bankruptcy restriction logs. 2. Produce a detailed written statement identifying every record category reviewed and every entity searched before making the no evidence claim. 3. Provide a complete Metro 2 or equivalent furnishing history showing exactly what was reported to each bureau, when it was reported, and what bankruptcy/account status codes were used. 4. Correct, delete, or clarify any inaccurate, misleading, or incomplete credit reporting associated with this account. 5. Explain in writing why it stated it would take no further action regarding future disputes, and whether that means it is refusing to consider new evidence. 6. Cease relying on conclusory statements that a matter is resolved where the actual investigation scope has not been disclosed. This complaint is not resolved. The companys XX/XX/XXXX response is conclusory, incomplete, and evasive. It does not explain the investigation steps taken, does not identify the records reviewed, does not address third-party repossession-related activity adequately, and does not provide the detailed furnishing information necessary to test the accuracy of its reporting. The CFPB should require a substantive response rather than allowing the company to close the matter with unsupported assurances.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation