Consumer complaint received 2026-05-17 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Repossession — Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle
Company: Westlake Services, LLC
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am requesting immediate media attention and consumer protection review regarding what I believe may be highly questionable, unfair, and potentially unethical repossession and lending practices involving Westlake Financial Services and XXXX XXXX XXXX In light of all that has transpired, this situation does not withstand reasonable scrutiny, and it should concern the public that consumers may lose their vehicles within approximately 30 days of purchase despite actively attempting to make payments and maintain communication with the lender, as well as information being withheld to consumers that can cause repossession. This repossession involved my VERY FIRST payment after purchasing the vehicle and putting down approximately {$5000.00} at the time of sale. That fact alone raises serious concerns regarding fairness, transparency, good-faith servicing practices, and whether consumers are being afforded meaningful opportunity to cure alleged defaults before losing both their transportation and substantial down payments. From a consumer protection standpoint, the public is placed at a severe disadvantage when companies are permitted to : -accept large down payments, -rapidly repossess vehicles within weeks, -provide little or no meaningful warning, -fail to clearly explain internal repossession policies, -acknowledge payment processing problems, and then allegedly transfer or return vehicles back to dealerships almost immediately after repossession. Consumers have no meaningful bargaining power in these situations and are often financially vulnerable, dependent upon transportation for employment, childcare, medical care, and basic daily life. When repossession practices appear rushed, poorly communicated, or potentially coordinated in a way consumers can not reasonably understand, the financial and emotional harm can be devastating. My payment was due on XX/XX/XXXX. I attempted to make payment through ACH on XX/XX/XXXX. The payment failed to process. I attempted another ACH payment on XXXX, which also failed. On XXXX, after receiving a returned payment notification, I immediately contacted Westlake Financial Services and made a debit card payment directly over the phone in good faith. During that conversation, the representative specifically informed me that their ACH system sometimes has issues. I was also told my late fees would be waived and that notes would be added to my account. At no point during that conversation was I warned that repossession was already pending or in process. Then on XX/XX/XXXX, I woke up and my vehicle had been repossessed during the middle of the night at approximately XXXX XXXX. After contacting police, I learned the vehicle had been privately repossessed. When I contacted Westlake Financial Services, I was told the vehicle had been repossessed because of a missed payment. When I requested a supervisor, I was informed the supervisor would not speak to me because there was a comment on the account stating that the dealership already owned the vehicle again. That statement immediately raised serious concerns for me regarding : -the speed of the repossession process, -the timing of ownership transfer, -whether payment acceptance and repossession activity were occurring simultaneously, -and whether consumers are receiving fair notice and honest communication throughout the process. I later learned there was allegedly a 15-day repossession policy and that my payment was processed on the XXXX day. However, despite repeated communication attempts and direct conversations with representatives, this policy was never clearly disclosed or meaningfully explained to me beforehand. From my perspective, consumers are placed in an impossible position when : -payment systems allegedly malfunction, -representatives acknowledge system problems, -payments are accepted, yet repossession proceeds anyway without warning. This creates the appearance that consumers may be deprived of any realistic opportunity to protect themselves or preserve their property interests. Things became even more troubling when I went to XXXX XXXX XXXX to retrieve my belongings. Staff initially claimed they did not know where the vehicle was located. When I refused to leave without my belongings, the vehicle suddenly appeared. When I requested repossession paperwork or documentation, I was told they had nothing and was instructed to have my lawyer contact them. I have since discovered numerous public complaints from other consumers alleging : -rapid repossessions, -payment processing failures, -communication breakdowns, -confusing account handling, -and feeling blindsided by repossession activity involving Westlake Financial Services. I also learned Westlake has previously faced lawsuits, settlements, and regulatory scrutiny involving consumer servicing and repossession-related issues. While allegations alone are not proof of wrongdoing, the volume of similar complaints combined with my own experience strongly suggests that these practices deserve public scrutiny and regulatory review. I am also concerned that the conduct described above may implicate broader consumer protection concerns involving unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices ( UDAAP ), including failures in transparency, communication, servicing disclosures, and fair treatment of consumers. Consumers should not be placed in situations where : -payment systems allegedly fail, -payments are accepted without meaningful warning of pending repossession activity, -material account information is not clearly disclosed, -or vehicles are rapidly repossessed and transferred without consumers fully understanding their rights, options, or account status. Federal consumer protection standards exist to ensure that lenders and dealerships act in good faith, communicate honestly, and avoid conduct that may mislead or unfairly disadvantage consumers. The circumstances surrounding the payment processing, repossession timing, rapid reassignment of the vehicle, and lack of transparency raise concerns regarding whether all actions were conducted in a commercially reasonable and transparent manner consistent with consumer protection standards, including protections against unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices under federal consumer financial laws and applicable consumer protection statutes. At minimum, consumers deserve : -transparency, -good-faith communication, -proper notice, -accurate disclosures, -fair servicing practices, -and meaningful opportunity to resolve payment issues before losing both their vehicles and substantial financial investments. I believe situations like this raise important public policy and consumer protection concerns regarding fairness in auto lending, repossession practices, and treatment of financially vulnerable consumers. I respectfully request investigative review into whether broader systemic issues may exist and whether consumers are being adequately protected. I can provide : -payment records, -account timelines, -witness-supported call recordings, -screenshots, -written complaints, -and additional supporting documentation

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation