Consumer complaint received 2026-01-21 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Lease
Issue: Problems at the end of the loan or lease — Termination fees or other problem when ending the lease early
Company: NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC
State: AR

Complaint narrative:
Core issue : A total-loss settlement and payoff were handled without transparent, itemized explanations and without keeping me meaningfully informed, and Im being bounced between the insurer and lienholder while key requested documentation is withheld. 

What happened ( tight bullets ) : Total loss declared ; insurer communicated/paid funds including the lienholder/lessor. 
You were not included in key communications about payoff/settlement handling. 
When you asked for itemization/explanations, insurer and lienholder pointed at each other. 
Insurer provided some documentation ; lienholder has not provided the requested payoff breakdown / departmental clarity. 
You sent a written request by tracked mail, delivered XX/XX/XXXX, and the lienholder claims confusion about the XXXX XXXX and redirects you to multiple departments/addresses. 
Customer service interactions have included belittling / misleading statements and inconsistent claims about who you were speaking with. 
the contract has two different definitions for the same thing ( Wholesale market value, adjusted lease balance, early termination liability, Early termination obligation etc. ) the contract says the payoff is calculated one way, but their payoff quote looks like another they refuse to provide an itemized payoff or keep changing which department handles it ( XXXX Verbal Request and XXXX written request on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. 
I can show you asked for clarification in writing and they still wont provide it The contract language is not consistently draftedthere are grammatical errors, undefined terms, and provisions that appear to contradict each other. Because of that lack of clarity, different representatives are giving different explanations of the payoff calculation. I want a written payoff breakdown with citations to the exact contract clauses used for each component. 

Here are the Contradictions in the lease agreement- The biggest contradiction is actually inside Section 25 itself Section 25 says ( paraphrasing precisely ) : A ) It promises a refund in one paragraph If insurance proceeds exceed your early termination obligations, we will agree to refund you only the pro-rated value of the capitalized cost reduction up to the amount of the excess insurance proceeds. 
It even explains the math method for that pro-rated refund. 

B ) Then it reverses itself later A few lines later it says : If the insurance loss proceeds exceed your early termination obligations, then the excess will not be refunded to you. 
And then : Any capitalized cost reduction made by you will not be refunded in the event of a total loss. 

Those cant all be true at the same time. Either : there is a pro-rated cap cost reduction refund ( limited by excess proceeds ), or there is no refund of excess proceeds and no refund of cap cost reduction. 

Thats not a typo. Thats internally inconsistent drafting on a material term. 

2 ) The cross-section conflict : Section 13 formula vs Section 25 full satisfaction Section 13 ( Early Termination ) lays out a formula-driven early termination charge involving : Adjusted Lease Balance ( base payments not yet due + residual value discounted, todays dollars via Constant Yield Method ), and subtracting Fair Market Wholesale Value ( assigned by them or based on valuation guides/ appraisal in certain disputes ). 

Thats a formula that can produce a big number.

Section 25 ( Total loss ) says something much stronger : If stolen ( not recovered ) or destroyed, we will accept insurance loss proceeds in full satisfaction of your early termination liability if you met conditions ( insurance obligations satisfied, deductible paid, not in default ).

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation