Consumer complaint received 2025-11-18 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: FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO.
State: AR

Complaint narrative:
I tried submitting this response on XX/XX/XXXX, but the website kept resetting and then said my claim was closed. Please reopen so my response to XXXX XXXX and requested assistance from the CFPB can be documented. I've been making regular efforts in recent weeks to navigate this between XXXX XXXX and the law firm mentioned below. 

Below is my response : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX response demonstrates systematic bad faith collection practices requiring CFPB enforcement action. Their own admissions prove misconduct while omitting critical facts about their defective vehicle and federal safety investigation involvement. 

XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX BAD FAITH PATTERN : Approximately XXXX  XXXX : XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX campaigns with repeated collection calls while refusing good faith settlement discussions. Despite multiple attempts to negotiate reasonable resolution acknowledging defective vehicle circumstances, XXXX XXXX provided no substantive responses or follow-up to legitimate settlement offers. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX Bad Faith Denial : Ford Motor Company XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX issued categorical denials without investigating the defective vehicle or inspecting the XXXX XXXX XXXX  that remains at the collision center in post-incident condition for XXXX  months as instructed. This bad faith denial without investigation violates due process while they demand vehicle preservation " in its condition '' for potential investigation that never occurred. 

Charge-Off Without Notification : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX without consumer notification. I only learned of this when they responded to my CFPB complaint on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX XXXX sent a collection letter offering discount settlement while concealing they had already charged off the debt, demonstrating systematic concealment of material information while maintaining collection pressure. 

Rapid Transfer After CFPB Response : Within less than XXXX weeks of their inadequate CFPB response on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX transferred my debt to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX firm on XX/XX/XXXX. This rapid transfer after CFPB complaint suggests retaliation and deliberate obstruction of consumer protection processes. 

Collection Agency Stonewalling : XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX initially engaged in settlement discussions, stating she would present my 40 % settlement offer ( {$23000.00} ) to XXXX XXXX and respond " with either acceptance of my offer or a counter-offer. '' She never provided any response. When I followed up, XXXX XXXX XXXX claimed the matter was " on hold '' and refused to provide any details whatsoever regarding the case, claiming the " on hold '' status prevented them from looking anything up, sharing any information with me, or even explaining the reason for the hold. Only suggestion provided was that I should try speaking with XXXX XXXX again because their law firm could not help me at said time. 

Corporate Finger-Pointing : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX " no longer have authority '' after transferring to the law firm and directed me back to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX This creates deliberate circular referral patterns designed to frustrate consumers into abandoning legitimate settlement efforts. 

FEDERAL AND STATE INVESTIGATION VALIDATES CLAIMS : On XX/XX/XXXX, a General Engineer with XXXX 's XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, contacted me requesting a phone conversation about the steering and braking incident involving the defective XXXX XXXX Explorer ( VIN : XXXX ). This federal XXXX contact validates my safety concerns and proves my complaints have merit worthy of federal investigation. 

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX only escalates consumer complaints when evidence supports legitimate safety concerns requiring manufacturer accountability. XXXX XXXX XXXX aggressive collection practices on debt related to a vehicle under federal safety investigation demonstrates corporate priorities that prioritize debt recovery over consumer safety and federal regulatory cooperation. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX initiated a Cause and Origin investigation after reviewing comprehensive evidence I provided in formal demand correspondence. This investigation was prompted by the same factual evidence that caused State Farm to reverse their initial denial of my claim, which had been based on misinformation provided by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX dealership. As far as documentation goes, the Cause and Origin investigation remains open and pending with no known completion date or official results. 

POINT-BY-POINT REBUTTAL TO XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX MISLEADING XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX refused to sign required paperwork and demanded a replacement vehicle free of payments. '' FACT : I offered multiple reasonable settlement alternatives including balance reduction to facilitate using insurance proceeds as down payment for another vehicle. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX characterization of reasonable settlement discussions as " demands '' demonstrates unwillingness to acknowledge defective vehicle circumstances that created this debt. 

XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  " Due to non-payment, and specifically as a direct result of XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  refusal to endorse insurance proceeds, his account was charged off. '' FACT : XXXX XXXX admits they charged off my account as retaliation for refusing their unreasonable terms, not due to inability to pay. Insurance proceeds of {$59000.00} were available to resolve the debt, but XXXX XXXX refused reasonable settlement discussions and chose punitive charge-off action instead of acknowledging product liability circumstances tied the to Substitution of Collateral ( SOC ) for the replacement vehicle agreed to by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX a XXXX XXXX. 

XXXX XXXX 's Claim : " Our review indicates the account is accurately reporting. '' FACT : XXXX XXXX fails to acknowledge this debt arose from their defective vehicle currently under federal safety investigation. Credit reporting that fails to reflect product liability circumstances and ongoing federal investigation involvement misrepresents the true nature of this debt to credit agencies. 

XXXX XXXX 'S CRITICAL OMISSIONS : XXXX XXXX 's response deliberately omits : XXXX No mention of defective vehicle causation - They ignore that debt exists because their defective XXXX XXXX XXXX  caused total loss incident XXXX No reference to vehicle preservation - They ignore that I've preserved their defective vehicle for 13 months as instructed for investigation that never occurred XXXX No mention of harassment campaign - They omit approximately XXXX  XXXX repeated calls demanding payment while refusing settlement discussions XXXX No acknowledgment of XXXX XXXX XXXX failures- They ignore that incomplete Substitution of Collateral duplication paperwork caused insurance claim complications DOCUMENTED ADMINISTRATIVE FAILURES AND CONSUMER HARM : The defective XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX provided as Substitution of Collateral replacement for a XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX to be a lemon under warranty. However, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX 's administrative failures created additional consumer harm when they required me to maintain insurance on the XXXX lemon until ALL paperwork was completed, which it wasn't prior to the accident. After piecemeal signings, plus document duplication in XX/XX/XXXX, the final paperwork ( along with insufficient sales tax check for the XXXX ) didn't arrive until XX/XX/XXXX, months after the XX/XX/XXXX accident. This administrative negligence by XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX meant the insurance claim should never have been filed with my insurance to begin with, creating the entire debt situation that XXXX XXXX now aggressively pursues. 

Instead of satisfactorily resolving transportation needs after the brand new XXXX was deemed a lemon and required 6 months of strained negotiations with XXXX, XXXX provided another defective vehicle that has upended my life causing over {$47000.00} in documented damages including rental costs, towing and storage fees, medical expenses, legal fees, and hardship beyond words. XXXX XXXX XXXX 's administrative negligence in releasing the vehicle without properly completed documentation and concealing a XXXX XXXX hold that should have prevented delivery all contributed to the safety incident and subsequent total loss. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX approved total loss settlement of {$59000.00}, but these funds can not provide personal benefit because they must be issued directly to XXXX XXXX, and applied, at least in part, to the loan balance. This creates financial imprisonment where I suffer massive harm from XXXX 's defective vehicle while receiving no compensation, and XXXX XXXX continues aggressive collection on debt caused by their own product defects and administrative failures. 

For over 13 months, I have been without reliable transportation while suffering ongoing financial harm from XXXX 's defective vehicle and administrative negligence. XXXX XXXX 's collection practices compound this harm by treating the debt as standard consumer credit rather than acknowledging the product liability circumstances and administrative failures that created the debt. 

CFPB XXXX XXXX REQUESTED : Investigation of XXXX XXXX 's bad faith collection practices, including rapid transfer to XXXX XXXX XXXX after CFPB complaint and subsequent coordinated stonewalling that prevents consumer resolution Intervention to force good faith settlement negotiations with recognition of defective vehicle circumstances, administrative failures, and federal safety investigation involvement Coordination with XXXX 's ongoing safety investigation to ensure Ford Motor Company addresses both safety accountability and related financial harm to consumers Enforcement action against XXXX XXXX 's systematic avoidance of consumer protection processes and deliberate obstruction of legitimate settlement efforts through circular referral patterns XXXX XXXX 's conduct violates consumer protection principles including good faith dealing, reasonable collection practices, and cooperation with federal regulatory processes. Their coordinated stonewalling with XXXX XXXX XXXX creates systematic barriers to consumer resolution requiring CFPB enforcement intervention. 

Given defective vehicle causation, administrative failures by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, federal safety investigation involvement, and documented consumer harm exceeding {$47000.00}, reasonable resolution would include XXXX XXXX settlement at XXXX % of charged-off balance ( $ XXXX {$23000.00} ) with immediate payment capability through State Farm insurance funds. This reflects industry standards for charged-off automotive debt while acknowledging the product liability circumstances, administrative negligence, and federal investigation involvement that distinguish this case from standard consumer credit matters. 

CFPB coordination with XXXX 's ongoing investigation would ensure comprehensive accountability for both safety violations and related financial harm, preventing Ford Motor Company from compartmentalizing safety and financial responsibilities while consumers suffer ongoing harm from their defective products and administrative failures.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation