Consumer complaint received 2026-03-22 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Loan opened without my consent or knowledge
Company: General Motors Financial Company, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
STATEMENT OF FACTS I. Background, How I Became Involved On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX was in the process of purchasing a vehicle at XXXX XXXX in XXXX, XXXX. She contacted me and asked whether I would serve as her cosigner. I agreed solely on that basis, to serve as a cosigner, not a buyer. I had no intention of purchasing a vehicle myself, had no role in selecting the vehicle, and had not been present for any prior negotiations at the dealership that day. II. The Fraudulent Role Misassignment When I arrived at XXXX XXXX that evening, Finance XXXX XXXX XXXX sat XXXX XXXX, me XXXX XXXX and my mother, at his desk and walked us through the contract terms on his computer screen. On that screen, XXXX XXXX showed what appeared to me that I was listed as the cosigner and XXXX XXXX was listed as the primary buyer. He verbally confirmed to me, when I asked directly, that I was the cosigner and not the buyer. He stated I was required to sign the tire protection contract as a buyer but reassured me that I remained the cosigner on the vehicle purchase contract. I signed the documents on an electronic signature pad. Because I was signing on a pad, not on the printed contract itself, I had no ability to see where my signature was being placed or how the parties were designated on the printed document. I relied entirely on what XXXX XXXX told me verbally and showed me on his computer screen. What I did not know, and what XXXX XXXX concealed from me, is that the printed contract had been structured with my name as the primary buyer and XXXX XXXX as the cosigner. This is the exact opposite of what was represented to me, verbally and visually, throughout the signing process. The fraud did not begin at the signing table. Earlier that same day, XXXX XXXX had already obtained a signed buyer 's order from XXXX XXXX, with her designated as the buyer of the vehicle. That document exists and is in my possession. It proves that XXXX XXXX knew the correct party designations before I ever walked through the door. The reversal of roles on the final printed contract was not a clerical error. It was a deliberate, premeditated act. III. Additional Deceptive Practices Beyond the fraudulent role assignment, the following deceptive acts were committed against us at the point of sale : XXXX XXXX failed to provide a Buyer 's Guide for the vehicle as required by the FTC Used Car Rule ( 16 C.F.R. Part 455 ). We never received this document. The tire protection contract for {$1100.00} was signed by me, not XXXX XXXX, despite the vehicle being sold to ( as XXXX XXXX represented ) XXXX XXXX as buyer. This contract was also signed under false pretenses. XXXX XXXX 's salesperson, XXXX XXXX, verbally represented that the dealership had inspected the vehicle and certified it was free of known issues. The check engine light activated within XXXX hours after purchase, and the dealership subsequently acknowledged they could reset the light so it would not be visible, indicating they were aware of the vehicle 's condition prior to sale. IV. The Formal Rescission Upon discovering that the printed contract had fraudulently designated me as the primary buyer, contrary to all representations made to me, we formally exercised our right to rescind the contract. Under Texas common law, a contract obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation is voidable by the defrauded party. Under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Tex. Bus. & Com. Code 17.50, rescission is an available remedy when fraud or misrepresentation has been used to sign a contract. Our rescission letter was sent via certified mail. XXXX / GM Financial received and signed for the rescission letter on XX/XX/XXXX, as confirmed by XXXX tracking documentation. XXXX XXXX deliberately refused to sign for their copy of the certified mail. However, the rescission was simultaneously transmitted to XXXX XXXX representative XXXX XXXX XXXX via email. This established actual written notice to XXXX XXXX regardless of their deliberate refusal to accept certified delivery. Under Texas law, deliberate refusal of certified mail does not defeat legal notice. When XXXX failed to honor the initial rescission, we sent a Final Demand for Immediate Rescission of Contract via certified mail. XXXX / GM Financial received and signed for this final demand on XX/XX/XXXX, as confirmed by XXXX tracking documentation. XXXX therefore had written notice of our demand for rescission on XXXX separate occasions, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, and failed to act on either. V. XXXXXXXX XXXX Unlawful Response to the Rescission XXXX XXXX GM Financial received our initial rescission letter on XX/XX/XXXX. Rather than investigating the fraudulent origination or honoring the rescission, XXXX took the position that the matter was between us and XXXX XXXX and declined to acknowledge the rescission. We subsequently sent a Final Demand for Immediate Rescission of Contract, which XXXX received on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX failed to honor this second demand as well. This position is legally untenable. Under the FTC Holder Rule, 16 C.F.R. 433, any consumer credit contract for a vehicle purchase is subject to all claims and defenses the buyer has against the seller. XXXX, as the assignee of this contract, stepped into XXXX XXXX 's legal position at the moment it purchased the contract. It can not accept the financial benefits of that contract while disclaiming the fraudulent conduct that produced it. XXXXXXXX XXXX refusal to acknowledge the rescission is itself a federal regulatory violation. Furthermore, XXXX communicated exclusively with XXXX XXXX regarding this account, an account reported in my name as the primary accountholder. This failure to communicate with the named account holder of record constitutes an additional violation. VI. Ongoing and Documented Financial Harm Despite receiving written notice of rescission on XX/XX/XXXX, and a Final Demand for Immediate Rescission on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX GM Financial has continued to report this account as delinquent to all three major consumer reporting agencies : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and subsequently picked up the truck on XX/XX/XXXX. As of XX/XX/XXXX, the account reflects XXXX months of derogatory payment history reported in my name. This derogatory reporting began on or around XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX days after XXXX received our initial rescission letter. At that point, no valid contract and no valid payment obligation existed. XXXX had no legal basis to report any payment delinquency against me after receiving the first rescission notice on XX/XX/XXXX, and certainly had no basis to continue reporting after receiving the Final Demand on XX/XX/XXXX. These false and unauthorized derogatory entries have caused me the following direct, measurable, and ongoing financial harms : I am actively attempting to qualify for a home mortgage. The derogatory entries placed by GM Finance on my credit report are directly impairing my ability to qualify. My home purchase is at risk due to reporting that GM FinancialXXXX had no legal authority to make. I recently purchased a vehicle and was required to obtain a cosigner specifically because my credit score was damaged by GM Financial/XXXX XXXX post-rescission derogatory reporting. I would not have needed a cosigner absent this unlawful conduct. These are not speculative or incidental harms. They are concrete, documented, and directly traceable to XXXX XXXX continued reporting on a contract that had been formally rescinded.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation