Consumer complaint received 2024-11-26 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Problem when making payments — 
Company: Applied Data Finance, LLC
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding my loan account with Applied Data Finance , LLC d/b/a Personify Financial, citing significant concerns about their loan servicing and reporting practices. My complaint is supported by the following detailed issues : 1. Non-Compliance with the Arbitration Clause in the Loan Agreement The loan agreement includes an arbitration clause requiring disputes to be resolved through arbitration. However, Personify charged off my account on or about XX/XX/year>, and reported it to credit bureaus without initiating or completing arbitration proceedings as mandated. 

The arbitration clause lacks clarity on its scope regarding charge-offs or credit reporting disputes. Specifically : It is unclear whether Personify was required to arbitrate disputes about my alleged default and the resulting charge-off.

The contract does not adequately define the steps Personify must take to resolve such disputes through arbitration, leaving room for misinterpretation and potential violations of the agreement.

I believe this ambiguity and bypass of arbitration constitutes non-compliance with the agreed terms.

2. Potential Violations of the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Due to Unclear Disclosures The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) mandates clear and conspicuous disclosures of key loan terms, including : Annual Percentage Rate ( APR ) Total finance charges Payment schedules and amounts The loan agreement lists an APR of 36.20 % but fails to provide a clear, easily understandable breakdown of how this rate translates into total finance charges or bi-weekly payment amounts. Additionally : The payment schedule lacks clarity on the total number of payments, how interest is calculated over time, and the final payoff amount.

Terms are embedded within dense legal language, making it difficult for the average consumer to fully comprehend the loan 's cost.

These issues may violate TILAs requirement for straightforward and prominent disclosures.

3. Discrepancies in Charge-Off Procedures and Reporting Accuracy Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Personify claims to follow FCRA requirements, yet there are concerns about the accuracy and integrity of their reporting : The charge-off was reported to XXXX without evidence of compliance with the arbitration clause.

The reporting reflects a " charged-off '' balance without clear documentation supporting how the balance was calculated, raising questions about its accuracy.

4. Excessive Interest Rates Potentially Violating State Usury Laws The loan agreement specifies an APR of 36.20 %, which may exceed the usury limits of certain states. However, the agreement does not explicitly state which states law governs the loan. This omission creates ambiguity about whether the interest rate complies with applicable laws.

For example, many states cap personal loan interest rates at a lower level than 36.20 %. Without clear identification of the governing state law, the lenders practices XXXX violate usury protections afforded to borrowers in my state of residence.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation