Consumer complaint received 2026-01-20 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Problems at the end of the loan or lease — Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off
Company: Bridgecrest Acceptance Corporation
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
PRIOR COMPLAINT # XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint Reviewer : I, declare under penalty of perjury that the following statement is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. This formal statement serves as the basis for a new complaint against Bridgecrest Acceptance Corporation, escalating and referencing my prior CFPB complaint [ insert previous complaint ID here, if known ; e.g., Complaint # XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ]. The prior complaint was closed with explanation only, based on Bridgecrests inadequate response dated XX/XX/XXXX, which failed to address key evidence of negligence, deceptive practices, and violations under federal laws including UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) and TILA ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ). This new filing emphasizes escalations, including new inconsistencies in Bridgecrests timeline, their violation of the Do Not Call ( DNC ) restriction during a sales call, and their continued holding of the vehicle title despite possession, which forced additional XXXX intervention and compounded my financial harm. 
Escalations and New Evidence Since Prior Complaint Since the closure of my prior complaint, I have uncovered further inconsistencies in Bridgecrests explanations and actions, supported by their own records, my authenticated text logs ( 128 messages ), call logs, and XXXX confirmations. These escalations demonstrate a pattern of deceptive conduct and abusive practices, causing avoidable harm through prolonged delays in title transfer for my XXXX XXXX XXXX, leading to my forced purchase of a second vehicle ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, also serviced by Bridgecrest ) and ongoing financial distress. 
XXXX. Inconsistent and Fabricated Timeline Excuses : Contrary to XXXX claims in their XX/XX/XXXX, response ( e.g., lost in transit and XXXX rejections ), my text logs reveal repeated, unchanging excuses without evidence of action : On XX/XX/XXXX, Bridgecrest spoke with my XXXX agent but provided no update on the title status or source. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I texted for an update ; they claimed a standoff between Virginia and Nevada, stating neither state had the title ( Nevada said they released it, Virginia said they never received it ). 
XXXX months later, on XX/XX/XXXX, they repeated essentially the same explanation, now adding the original title was lost in transit and duplicates were flagged/rejected by the DMV. If neither state had possession in XXXX, who was mailing it to be lost in transit? This inconsistency shows Bridgecrest fabricated excuses and took no meaningful steps during that four-month spanno additional requests, escalations, vendor follow-ups, or DMV communications are documented , indicating a complete lack of diligence and bad-faith delays.

2. Violation of DNC Restriction and Withholding of Title : Bridgecrests DNC excuse is irrelevant and contradicted by their own actions. They received the duplicate paper title on XX/XX/XXXX, but held it for 35 days without forwarding to XXXX, despite three prior verified requests. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, they placed outbound calls to me and my co-borrower XXXX XXXX to welcome us as XXXX drivers for the new XXXX loan they originatedviolating the DNC restriction they cite as a barrier to updates. During this sales call, they casually mentioned locating the XXXX title but did nothing to ensure I received it ; I still had to pursue it through my XXXX agent. 
My XXXX agent faxed a fourth formal request, only after which Bridgecrest mailed the title ( delivered XX/XX/XXXX ). This escalation highlights their refusal to act even after possession and direct notification. 
These escalations build on my prior complaint, showing Bridgecrest profited from my distress ( approving the second loan amid XXXX delinquency without disclosing the title status ) while causing ascertainable losses, including extra interest, second car costs, and risks from unregistered driving.

Laws Violated ( Reiterated and Escalated ) Bridgecrests escalated actions violate federal laws enforced by the CFPB : Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) under Dodd-Frank ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) : Causing avoidable harm through deceptive timelines, non-disclosure during the second loan approval, and abusive withholding of the title, leading to additional debt.

Truth in Lending Act ( TILA, 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ) : Failing to accurately disclose credit terms by approving the XXXX loan without revealing the XXXX title resolution, misleading me into further obligation. 
I have supporting evidence, including the attached texts, Bridgecrests letter, and prior submissions. 
Relief Sought Rescission of both contracts, immediate lien/title releases without fee, {$61000.00} in per diem compensation ( $ XXXX for 305 days ), reimbursement of all costs ( interest, fees ), punitive damages, waived fees, and clean credit reports. 
Executed on XX/XX/XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation