Consumer complaint received 2023-10-10 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Credit denial
Company: SANTANDER HOLDINGS USA, INC.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I applied for a XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX with XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX on XXXXXX/XX/2023. I was told by a representative of the company ( sales agent/finance manager ) that they had only run my application with one of their lenders which was false information. They presented my application to approximately 6 of their lenders. I was also told after the application had been submitted that I was denied by the lender/lenders which was also false information. After 28 days I decided to call the lenders that they had claimed denied my application. It had been nearly 30 days and I had received only one adverse action letter, which was from XXXX XXXX. I reached out to Santander Consumer USA ( one of the lenders ) which is directly connected with Chrysler Capital. I called for more information regarding my application ID and the adverse action letter that I had not received. I was given the number to the funding department and was told by one of the funding department 's customer service agents that I had in fact been approved after retrieving the application ID using my social security number. I was supplied with three different application ID numbers. There were two conditional approvals and one regular approvals. I will be happy to provide those IDs if required. The regular approval was estimated at {$23000.00}. The first conditional approval was estimated at around {$71000.00} and the second conditional approval was estimated at around {$55000.00}. According to the Federal Fair Lending Regulations and Statutes- Equal Credit Opportunity, neither the dealership nor the lender gave proper notice of a favorable amount approved so that I could exercise my right to accept or decline the offer extended by the lender. This led to my application expiring. I contacted the dealership to alert them about the lack of notification and the false information that I had been given on XX/XX/2023, and was referred to a finance manager named XXXX. He informed me that he'd get another application drawn up, but I informed him that I wanted to accept the approval from Santander/Chrysler Capital being that the application was not yet at the 30-day expiration date. He told me that he could not get approval from the lender unless I agreed to supply money for the finance charge that the lender was requiring. I informed him that a down payment/finance is the sum of all charges, and the charge does not include charges of a type payable in a comparable cash transaction, so it is not required by law. 15 USC subsection 1605 determination of finance charge. He confirmed that it was not in fact required by law, but he proceeded to press the issue that nothing could be done without it. I proceeded to contact Santander/Chrysler Capital about removing that condition since it was not required by law, unfortunately, the department was closed, and I assured the finance manager that we could proceed Monday morning when the funding department was open so that we could proceed with financing with that lender. He said he looked forward to it. Monday morning, I called the lender and informed them that I intended to conditionally accept their offer if the unrequired condition was removed. They told me the credit department and dealership were the only ones with the authority to remove that condition, but they refused to. I was informed by a salesperson named XXXX that the fourth application that I had submitted that morning with Santander/Chrysler Capital was automatically denied. Since they work directly with the lender 's credit department, I so rightfully assumed that the information for denial was known and just wasn't being stated to me directly. I told them that I was aware that I was being avoided which is harmful behavior and expressed that I was contemplating litigation. I never confirmed that this was the course of action that would be taken, only that it was being considered and only then did I receive an immediate response which was odd. Whoever was messaging me at the time decided to cease communication and not respond despite me reaffirming that legal action was only an idea and not a course of action that was taken against them or the lender. I remained patient throughout the entire process despite being given false information, enduring discrimination, as well as non-compliance. As far as the other 4 lenders : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX only two of them ( XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX ) confirmed that they had also approved me for a specific amount from the application submitted on XXXXXX/XX/2023. XXXX had approved me for an amount that was estimated at around {$23000.00}, while XXXX XXXX XXXX had approved me for an amount that was estimated at around {$30000.00}. XXXX XXXX chose not to disclose an approval amount or total denial and XXXX disclosed that I was completely denied. I'm not sure about the accuracy of each of those claims. 

In conclusion, neither of the lenders that had approved me for funding sent out a notice of a favorable decision giving me knowledge of the approval amounts thus leaving me in the blind and unable to act on whether I'd like to accept or deny the offer given. Despite the dealership knowing the true nature of these approvals they chose to give me false information and persuaded me to participate in an act that was not required of me by law. This experience with the dealership and its agents/representatives as well as those responsible for carrying out their duties on behalf of these lenders was harmful and damaging to my personal being, to say the least.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation