Consumer complaint received 2026-02-19 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Problem with additional products or services purchased with the loan
Company: OneMain Finance Corporation
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
Executive Summary This complaint involves systemic violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( Regulation E ), the Truth in Lending Act ( Regulation Z ), and Section 5 of the FTC Act ( Unfair and Deceptive Acts ). OneMain Financial ( " the Lender '' ) unilaterally increased a preauthorized bi-weekly electronic draft without the mandatory 10-day notice, misrepresented the interest-bearing nature of a creditor-placed insurance ( CPI ) charge, and manually manipulated legal documents to minimize a required refund. 1. Violation of Regulation E ( 12 CFR 1005.10 ( d ) ) The Lender added a {$420.00} XXXX premium to my unpaid principal balance on XX/XX/year>. On XX/XX/year>, only XXXX days later, the Lender drafted {$270.00} from my bank account ; an increase from my authorized biweekly fixed amount of {$250.00}. The Violation : Regulation E requires a written notice of the amount and date of a varying transfer at least 10 days before the transfer. The Proof : It is mathematically impossible for the Lender to have provided a 10-day notice for a payment amount that was only calculated and posted XXXX hours prior to the draft. 2. Violation of Regulation Z & Deceptive Practices Branch and insurance department representatives have repeatedly claimed verbally and in writing that the XXXX charge " does not accrue interest. '' The Evidence : My XX/XX/year>, billing statement explicitly shows the {$420.00} charge was added to the " Principal '' column. The Extraction : Because the loan is a XXXX XXXX XXXX contract at XXXX %, adding {$420.00} to the principal balance automatically extracts approximately {$0.00} per day in additional interest. Claiming this charge is " interest-free '' while using it to inflate interest-bearing principal is a deceptive act. 3. Breach of Contract ( Section E : Required Insurance ) The loan agreement states that insurance disbursements " shall become additional debt ... payable upon notice from Lender to me requesting payment. '' The Breach : No such " request for payment '' was ever issued. The Lender bypassed the contractual requirement for a payment request and instead moved directly to an unauthorized electronic extraction. 4. Documentary Manipulation & Improper Refund Calculation The insurer ( XXXX ) confirmed a policy termination date of XX/XX/year>. However, a supervisor ( " XXXX '' ) provided an " adjusted '' Certificate of Insurance with a manually stamped termination date of XX/XX/year>. The Impact : This manual one-day " adjustment '' allows the Lender to retain an extra day of unearned premium and an extra day of XXXX % interest on the " phantom '' principal. This is a violation of the XXXX XXXX " full refund '' requirement. 5. Obstruction of Billing Dispute On XX/XX/year>, I attempted to resolve these discrepancies with the XXXX branch ( XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ). Management refused to provide a complete transaction history or amortization ledger, any prior notices allegedly mailed to me, or my autopay agreement, claiming the records were " inaccessible. '' This prevents me from verifying the accuracy of the interest extraction and constitutes a bad-faith obstruction of a formal billing inquiry

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation