Consumer complaint received 2024-12-20 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Getting a loan or lease — Changes in terms mid-deal or after closing
Company: The Savings Group, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I was using the personal financial management application XXXX XXXX. The app offered to show auto loan refinancing options. The app also has credit score and personal information to customize offers for credit cards and other financial opportunities. 

In the auto loan refinance : the app showed my current terms, rate and payment information. It then showed multiple offers from different companies where I could save money. After reviewing several of these across a number of situations lower payment vs. lower rate vs. longer term, I selected an offer that was attractive to my situation. It was slightly longer term in months, had the lowest interest rate, and overall reduced the amount of interest. 

After applying, I was offered a chance to complete the loan application. I connected with a loan specialist on a recorded line. The representative from XXXX  explained that they have 120 different banking institutions working for Autopay. Then I started to get worried since it sounded like the terms of the original offer were not already pre-approved. It was feeling like a bait and switch. 

The rep collected information to get the blue book value on a XXXX  vehicle. This was another flag for me, since the value of the vehicle was now under question. They had the vehicle information in XXXX XXXX. I further expressed my concerns. He assured me that my credit was good, but the value would impact the rate of the offer. I now was highly skeptical since that whole deal was in question, but he thought he could get me a quick response : 20 min. The rep had to contact the lender to understand what the value should be used on the vehicle. 

While still concerned, I mentioned that the rate advertised was good enough and if this worked out, I wanted to consider another refinance opportunity during the initial call. 

When I was called back : my concerns were validated. Not only had the terms drastically changed, I was being offered a rate more than what I have today. Also, the terms were extended to 84 months. Overall, the payment dropped less than {$100.00}. This was all breezed through by the rep to then offer me additional opportunities : like gap insurance and vehicle protection plan : which the rep highly recommended for my vehicle. 

I stopped the rep to review the key terms and ask why the drastic difference between what was offered online and now in the process. I was told that there was a fictional bank in XXXX  that may have that rate available, but since I am in a different region : I am not eligible for those terms. Furthermore, I countered that it doesn't make sense to offer someone rates when they know my address before the application is even started ( in XXXX XXXX ). This information is prefilled into the form. 

I was told both calls are on a recorded line. We also had a chat via text message. 

The vehicle value was also in question. I was told I was financing 105 % of a XXXX  vehicle with only XXXX or so miles. The window sticker is over $ XXXX. XXXX value is $ XXXX to $ XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation