Sign in

Acima Credit

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Acima Credit? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Credit Services Acima Credit

Acima Credit Reviews (246)

Acima Credit, LLC (FKA: Simple Finance; hereinafter “Acima” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Mr*** *** through the Revdex.com on February 16th, We have investigated the allegations made and are prepared to provide all the facts surrounding the transaction to
fully explain the nature of the Lease Agreement (“Agreement”) and the contractual obligations of Mr***.Acima is a virtual rent-to-own organization that partners with retail merchants to provide alternative lease-purchase financing to those who may not qualify for traditional financingOn June 19, 2016, Mr*** applied and was approved for our leasing services through an independent third-party, VIP Wheels and Tires (the “Merchant”), located in Los Angeles, California Mr*** was approved for $2,worth of financing with Acima Of this amount, he invoiced $1, He paid a $application fee in-store and a $account closure fee is added into the 90-Day early purchase option (EPO) to give the total 90-Day price of $1, The 90-Day EPO is a courtesy we provide to our customers to allow them to pay off the Agreement early Mr***’s 90-Day expiration date was September 18, Mr*** has three points of complaint claiming he did not initially receive a copy of the Agreement by email prior to signing, that he did not agree to the finance charge associated with the Agreement, and generally paying more for his tires and rims than he anticipated Mr*** alleges that during the application and purchase process, Acima told him he “would receive a text with a code and [he] did, also saying [he] would receive a copy of the contract via email.” At the time of the purchase transaction, Mr*** received a text message on his personal cell phone reading, “Notice! Using this code is equal to physically signing Simple’s lease-to-own contract Call (800)742-xwith any questionsCode ***.” After receiving this code, or personal identification number (PIN), Mr*** used the PIN with the Merchant to initiate the Agreement At the time the PIN was entered into the Merchant’s Portal, the Agreement in its entirety was available for review in electronic form Our customers have the opportunity to view the Agreement electronically or request a printed copy before using the PIN to sign the Agreement Acima was not physically present at the time Mr*** used the code to sign the Agreement and therefore cannot confirm or deny if Mr*** reviewed the Agreement prior to signing Additionally, we do not send Agreements by email due to the sensitive information contained therein Per Acima policy, we send the Agreement by mail with a Welcome Letter to the customer’s address listed on their application We have record of sending these documents to the listed address on June 20, Since the Agreement and Welcome Letter were not returned to us by the USPS, we assumed Mr*** had all of the information regarding his lease Mr*** protests our Agreement’s finance charge by saying he “did not agree to the amount.” Mr*** did agree to assume the finance charge by signing the Agreement and using our services By signing the Agreement, Mr*** agreed to all changes and conditions contained therein Mr*** mentions in his complaint, “I have paid a total of $1,at $every two weeks not $which was suppose to be to payment amount.” Mr*** was originally contracted for bi-weekly payments of $ Acima builds our customers’ payment arrangements according to customer paycheck schedules According to our records, Mr*** is paid semi-monthly Therefore he will make payments per year instead of payments per year on the bi-weekly schedule The decreased total number of payments caused his regular payment amount to increase from $bi-weekly to $semi-monthly to satisfy the $2,Total of Payments for ownership of the Property Acima regrets Mr*** did not view the Agreement prior to signing it The Agreement is a legal and binding document As stated in Section of Mr***’ Agreement, Acima owns the Property Mr*** is not allowed to keep the Property and discontinue his regular lease renewal payments, To do so would be a breach of the Agreement If Mr*** no longer finds the terms of our Agreement desirable, he can terminate the Agreement by exercising his second early purchase option, or surrender the Property to us and paying any applicable outstanding balances If Mr*** requires further information or would like to speak with us regarding solutions, we encourage him to call Acima’s Customer Service Department at (801)297-

Acima Credit (“Acima”) received Mrs***’s second rejection of our response on March 31, We regret Mrs*** finds our explanation and Agreement terms unsatisfactory As stated in our previous responses, Ms*** was sent a copy of the Agreement and had the opportunity to view the Agreement prior to signing itThe Agreement clearly states she is obligated to make monthly payments of $for the duration of the month lease termAcima does not have a lease model that is not a 12-month lease agreementIf Ms*** wishes to obtain ownership of the Property, she must call our Collections and Recovery Department at (801) 297-to cure the default on her account.We thank Mrs*** for her business and hope to resolve her grievances within the terms of the Agreement

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. I will reach out to Acima and hopefully work towards a mutual resolution
Sincerely,
*** ***

Acima Credit, LLC (FKA: Simple Finance; hereinafter “Acima” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Ms*** *** through the Revdex.com on February 8th, Ms*** has disputed the validity of the Agreement in its electronic format, the failure to disclose properly the
terms of the Agreement, and the total amount owedWe intend to explain the nature of the transaction, the facts surrounding the situation, and the contractual obligations of Ms***.Acima is a virtual rent-to-own organization that partners with retail merchants to provide alternative lease-purchase financing to those who may not qualify for traditional financingWe purchase household goods from independent third-party merchants and offer a 12-month lease of our purchased property to consumers who are approved for our servicesIf a customer pays all lease renewal payments, or exercises an Early Purchase Option (“EPO”) (described below), they may acquire ownership of the propertyOn June 1, 2016, Ms*** applied and was approved for our leasing services through an independent third-party, Furniture Queen (the “Merchant”), located in Katy, Texas Acima purchased a twin bed, nightstand, chest, and mattress (the “Property”) from the Merchant and leased the Property to Ms*** for a rental period of months wherein Ms*** agreed to pay $for ownership of the Property through twice-monthly payments of $The Agreement identifies the Total of Payments owed to acquire ownership of the Property and Early Purchase Options (“EPO”) available to Ms*** if she wishes to purchase the Property before the end of the 12-month rental termThe Agreement states, “[t]he total of your payments will be $(“Total of Payments”)The Total of Payments is the amount you must pay in order to acquire ownership of the Property, unless you exercise an early purchase option as outlined herein.” The first EPO available is the 90-Day Option which allowed Ms*** to purchase the Property within the first days of the Agreement by paying $The second EPO allows her to purchase the Property after the first days by paying 50% of the total remaining periodic lease payments.In Ms***’s complaint, she alleges that she never saw, nor had the opportunity to review the contract before signing it because the Agreement was in electronic formShe claimed that because of her inability to review the contract, the Agreement was deceptive and “[hid] from [her] what the contract truly states,” disputing the true lease amount that was requested and discussed with the MerchantAcima was not present during the transaction at the Merchant with Ms*** and as such cannot attest to Ms***’s claim that she did not see the Agreement prior to signing itNotwithstanding, the Portal through which all Agreements are signed and returned to Acima provides a copy of the Agreement to be viewed electronically or printed on paper prior to signingMs*** had the opportunity to review the Agreement, whether she requested this option or not Acima uses an advanced authentication process whereby most lease-purchase agreements are entered into electronicallyThis authentication process requires customers to enter a one-time verification code that is delivered to the customer’s phone via text message, into the Merchant’s computer to electronically sign the AgreementUpon approving Ms***’s application, Acima initiated a text message to her personal cell phone containing a four-digit authorization code or personal identification number (the “PIN”) to be used as Ms*** electronic authorization of the AgreementThe text message delivered to Ms*** on June 1, said “Notice! Using this code is equal to physically signing Simple’s lease-to-own contractCall (800) 742-xwith any questionsCode ***.” Ms*** used the PIN number to accept and sign the Agreement Ms*** was advised in the text message containing the PIN that she could call us with any questions she had about the Agreement before signing it Ms***’s assumption that Acima’s agreement terms are similar or identical to another company is not a reasonable dispute of the validity of our Agreement terms In her complaint, Ms*** claims that Acima called her and told her she was signed up for a 90-day buyout planThis is not trueWhen new customers establish their first contact with Acima at the beginning of their lease agreement, Acima will advise them of their 90-Day Early Buyout Expiration Date, the Early Buyout Amount, and the date of their first automated regular paymentAcima has received one phone call from Ms*** since the purchase date On February 7, 2017, Ms*** called Acima and spoke with a representative who advised Ms*** the Agreement was available for review before signing Ms*** was aware, by admission in her complaint, she was required to call Acima to arrange additional payments to exercise EPOsIn her complaint, she claims that she was unaware of any “penalty” if she were to pay off her lease after the first days of the Agreement; however, in her complaint she also cites part of the Welcome Letter that advises her if she does not exercise the 90-day Early Purchase Option, there would be an alternative Purchase Option after the 90-DaysThis second Early Purchase Option amount cannot be specified in the Welcome Letter because the amount is calculated from the number of remaining payments at the time the EPO is executedBy citing this letter Ms*** acknowledges that she was aware there would be a different purchase option if she failed to exercise her 90-Day EPO.Ms*** said, “The problem with this company is they word this early buy out constantly, and hide from the consumer what the contract truly statesThey only ever speak about the day buyout, without informing the consumer that there is a problem if they do not do the days.” The 90-Day Option is a courtesy provided to customers which allows them to pay off the Agreement earlyIf a customer is unable to pay off the Agreement early, they are not penalized, they simply are bound to the terms of the Agreement that was signedMs*** was upset that Acima advertised the most affordable purchase option for her, claiming that we were “hiding” what the contract statesAcima did not hide the contract in any way from Ms***, and educated her on the most affordable purchase option available to herMs*** did not pay $by the 90-Day Option expiration date of September 15, and consequently is obligated to pay the Total of Payments as stated in the AgreementMs*** said, “…my welcome paper states…’If you wish to utilize either of these options, please contact our office and set up a payment agreement with one of our customer service representatives." This was a lieThey did not let me set up any payment agreement.” Acima cannot set up new payment agreements in lieu of what was previously arranged in the Agreement as it would be a violation of the terms of the Agreement We allow our customers to pay off the Agreement on their own terms and thus advise our customers to call us to set up one-time advance payments in addition to the contractual automatic payments This freedom is referenced in the Welcome Letter as the “payment agreement” Ms*** speaks of in her complaint This policy exists to allow customers to pay off their Agreement early at their own pace based on the financial capacities of each customer.Ms*** further claimed, “The lady on the phone informed, and agreed with me that I hadn't seen the contract before agreeing to it, and told me if I had questions about the 'contract', I should have asked.” Our representative did not agree that Ms*** had not seen the Agreement prior to signing it, but expressed empathy for the frustration Ms*** was feeling Our agent advised Ms*** that Acima will not negotiate Agreement terms and that the Agreement was available for review before signing Acima regrets that Ms*** did not request to see the Agreement or obtain a copy of the Agreement prior to signing itAnother copy of the Agreement is available to Ms*** if she wishes to call us and request it. It is Ms***’s responsibility to be well informed and contact Acima with any questions she may have regarding her payment arrangement and Agreement

Revdex.com:
It seems as if big business has the upper handI thought Revdex.com was to even the playing fieldThis sucks
Sincerely, Out of $and a place to sleep

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because with your statement of Acima doesn’t charge interest - that is incorrect because as of my most recent interaction with a manager he stated that the interest + cost of the vehicles tires would be triple the cost of what I originally purchased the tires forThe way you pick and choose to assist your customers is unethicalJust because I didn’t call immediately to inform you that I was affected by the Hurricane doesn’t mean I shouldn’t be assisted like the others were. I hope this experience helps others in the future understand what kind of business you run and informs them that the only correspondence they will EVER receive is in the very beginning, they won’t receive statements to let them know where they are in the payment process! I have learned my lesson in the future not give other options/companies a try, instead go with a company that comes with a better recommendationI am not one to skip out on bills - I tried taking care of my account more than once and Acima wouldn’t budge with anything other than horrible customer serviceThis is definitely a company that’s all about money and nothing about Customer Service
Sincerely,
*** ***

Simple RTO, LLC (d/b/a: Simple Finance, hereinafter “Simple” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Ms*** *** through the Revdex.com on August 2, On June 18, 2016, Ms*** entered Katy Furniture (the “Merchant”), an independent third-party located in Katy, TX,
and conducted a transaction that required the leasing services of SimpleMs*** signed a “Lease-Purchase Agreement” (the “Agreement”), which allowed him to possess tangible personal property owned by Simple, by paying periodic lease renewal paymentsThe Agreement states the terms of payments owed, and the nature of the AgreementSimple is a virtual rent-to-own organization that provides alternative leasing options to consumers who may not qualify for traditional financing optionsWe purchase household goods from independent third-party merchants and then offer a 12-month lease of our purchased property to consumers who are approved for our servicesIf a customer pays all of the lease renewal payments, or exercises an Early Purchase Option (“EPO”) (described below), they may acquire ownership of the propertyMs*** applied and was approved for this leasing service from Simple on June 18, Simple purchased a sofa loveseat (the “Property”) from the Merchant and leased the Property to Ms*** through a 12-month Agreement wherein Ms*** agreed to pay $for ownership of the Property through twice-monthly payments of $over the course of monthsThe Agreement identifies the total of payments and EPOs“The total of your payments will be $(“Total of Payments”)The Total of Payments is the amount you must pay in order to acquire ownership of the Property, unless you exercise an early purchase option as outlined herein.” The two (2) EPOs available are; first, the 90-Day Option: “You may choose to purchase the Property at any time during the first ninety (90) days of this Agreement by paying $(“90-Day Option”).;” and the second EPO, “After ninety (90) days of this Agreement, you may purchase the property by paying the Simple Cash Price multiplied by the number of payments remaining for ownership, divided by the total number of payments necessary for ownership, plus any other charges.” In Ms***’s complaint, she claims, “I was advised of a day buyout option which included payments of approximately $upon initial purchase on 6/18/16.Upon contacting Simple Finance a couple days after purchase and advising that I want to accept this payment option…” While speaking to a representative in the Processing Department of Simple, Ms*** was given an estimate payment plan whereby she could exercise the 90-Day OptionShe was told that if she paid approximately $a month, she would be able to pay the 90-Day Option Amount of $by the deadline of September 19, Although the Processing Department has no method by which they can alter lease terms or scheduled payments, Ms*** was under the impression that her payment plan had be changed to process $on the 15th of each month, as requested, for three (3) monthsOnce her lease had been funded, the Customer Service Department received no notification that Ms*** had any desire to adjust her payment frequency from twice-monthly to monthly paymentsBecause two different departments use different computer systems, the Customer Service Department did not have record of Ms*** requesting monthly payments, thereby causing confusion in the Customer Service Department and frustration from Ms***To exercise an Early Purchase Option, it would be necessary that a Ms*** call Simple’s Customer Service Department after the funding of her lease, to authorize additional payments than what was authorized in the AgreementTo protect the safety and financial security of all customers, Simple will not violate terms of the Agreement by processing payments that were not expressed in the Agreement, without express written authorization from the customer to modify the Agreement’s contentsSimple has since sent and received the “Regular Payment Frequency Change Request” from Ms***, authorizing her payment frequency to change from twice-month payments of $to monthly payments of $225.42, to be drafted for a due date of the 15th of each monthSimple also will be extending the 90-Day Option deadline to October 19, 2016, giving Ms*** reasonable time to exercise her 90-Day Option Simple formally and sincerely apologizes to Ms*** for the miscommunication between departments and the undue inconvenience put upon Ms*** while trying to resolve the issueSimple would like to thank Ms*** for the professional manner in which the situation was brought to our attention by proactively communicating with us, and for the patience she showed during the resolution periodMs*** has been an exemplary customer whose business is appreciated very muchWe hope by resolving the issue we have been able to restore good relations with Ms*** and hope to do business with her again in the future

Acima Credit, LLC (FKA: Simple Finance; hereinafter “Acima” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Ms*** *** through the Revdex.com on February 16th, We have investigated the allegations made and are prepared to provide all the facts surrounding the transaction to
fully explain the nature of the Lease Agreement (“Agreement”) and the contractual obligations of Ms***.Acima is a virtual rent-to-own organization that partners with retail merchants to provide alternative lease-purchase financing to those who may not qualify for traditional financingOn June 10, 2016, Ms*** applied and was approved for our leasing services through an independent third-party, Furniture & More (the “Merchant”), located in Dover, Delaware Ms*** was approved for $1,of financing to purchase an ottoman and sectional sofa (the “Property”) Our Agreement is a 12-month lease of the Property from Acima to Ms*** The Agreement stipulates she must pay regular lease renewal payments of $weekly for twelve (12) months to acquire ownership of the Property The total of all payments she would make for the duration of the 12-month lease is $2,unless she exercises one of the two early purchase options (EPOs) available to her She paid a $application fee in-store and a $account closure fee is added into the 90-Day early purchase option (EPO) to give the total 90-Day price of $1, The 90-Day EPO is a courtesy we provide to our customers to allow them to pay off the Agreement early Ms***’s 90-Day expiration date was October 25, 2016.Ms*** alleges she was under the impression her weekly payments of $would pay off the Property in days Ms*** began making weekly payments on August 4, Between the initiation of weekly regular payments and the expiration of her 90-Day EPO, she made payments of $ The total of payments made before her 90-Day EPO expiration was $ This is not even half of the retail price of the Property Ms*** did not call Acima to exercise her 90-Day EPO by paying off her balance before October 25, and therefore is bound to the full contract amount of $2,128.96.In her complaint, Ms*** alleges the Agreement was not sent to her home and that she was unaware of the finance charges associated with her Agreement However, at the time Ms*** purchased the Property, she signed the Agreement Acima sends a copy of the Agreement and a Welcome Letter to our customers at the address listed on their applications We have record of sending these documents to Ms***’s residence on July 27, Since the documents were not returned to us as undelivered by the USPS, we assumed Ms*** had received the documents Ms*** alleges our customer services agents were “beyond rude and incompetent.” On February 10, 2017, Ms*** called our customer service department to ask for her remaining balance Our agent, Angie, informed Ms*** of her remaining balance of $ This angered Ms***, so our agents explained the Agreement terms and options to Ms*** Ms*** demanded a supervisor and was transferred to our supervising agent The supervisor reported Ms*** was irate and screaming about her balance The supervisor referred Ms*** to the Agreement and stated all payment information is contained in Section Our supervisor sent Ms*** a copy of her Agreement and Welcome Letter via email Our agents handled this escalated call calmly and provided Ms*** with information regarding her Agreement Ms*** alleges when she contacted the Merchant about our finance charge, “the [Merchant’s] employees were completely unaware of the 100% service fee.” Our merchants are our business partners and understand our business model and agreements The Merchant was likely unaware of the “service fee” because the Agreement is a financed over a 12-month term The regular payments reflect the full total of payments to ownership and therefore include all financing charges As a result, there is no external or additional finance charge associated with the Agreement; meaning there is no service fee Ms*** has asked for her payments to cease as she has paid off the cash price of the Property Ms*** can terminate her Agreement with us by exercising her second EPO for the price of $ Ms*** is not permitted to keep the Property and cease regular lease renewal payments as she does not own the Property If Ms*** no longer finds the terms of her agreements desireable, she can terminate her Agreement by returning the Property to us and paying any applicable outstanding balances If Ms*** requires further information, we encourage her to call our Customer Services Department at (801) 297-

Acima Credit, LLC (FKA: Simple Finance; hereinafter “Acima” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Ms*** *** through the Revdex.com on May 9, We have investigated the concerns in the complaint and are prepared to explain the nature of the transaction between Ms
*** and Acima Acima is a virtual rent-to-own organization that partners with retail merchants to provide alternative lease financing to consumers who may not qualify for traditional financingWe purchase household goods from independent third-party merchants and then offer a 12-month lease of our purchased property to consumers who are approved for our servicesOn December 3, 2016, Ms*** applied and was approved for this service through an independent third-party--F & F Tire Shop (the “Merchant”)--located in Roxbury, MassachusettsAcima purchased four tires (the “Property”) from the Merchant and entered into a Lease-Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) with Ms*** wherein she agreed to pay $every-other-week for months to obtain ownership of the Property for a total of $(“Total of Payments”) The Agreement provides for two Early Purchase Options (EPOs) available to Ms*** to obtain ownership of the Property before the end of the 12-month lease termThe first EPO is the 90-Day Option which allows Ms*** to purchase the Property for $within the first days of the AgreementThe 90-Day option expired on March 5, After days, there is a second EPO that would allow Ms*** to purchase the Property by paying 75% of the total remaining lease payments, in one transactionThis second EPO is currently available with a pay-off amount of $With each lease payment made, this second EPO pay-off amount changes as the remaining balance is paid down In her complaint, Ms*** states “I was told because it is over days I have to pay $to settle.” The second EPO pay-off amount is not a settlement, rather an option that allows Ms*** to end her 12-month Agreement early by purchasing the Property at a discounted price from the Total of Payments Ms*** said, “They have never sent any correspondence letting me know my balances.” Acima mailed a copy of the Agreement to Ms*** at the mailing address provided on her initial application after the consummation of the AgreementShe also said she sent “Simplefinance” an email requesting information regarding her balanceHer email was received and Acima responded to her on April 4, 2017, notifying her that for security reasons we could not divulge account information over email but that if she would call the Customer Service Department, we would answer her account-specific questionsWe never received another email from Ms*** Ms*** stated she was never informed of the change in our company nameThis is not trueAcima sent an email to every customer notifying them of the change in our business name in January We did not change ownership, management, or locationThe organization only changed its nameHowever, if we had changed ownership, the Agreement provides for the allowance of reassignment where it states, “”We,” “our,” and “us” mean Simple RTO, LLC, and its successors and assigns, as Lessor/Owner of the Property.” This name change to Acima does not affect the legal validity of Ms***’ Agreement, nor the obligations contained therein Ms*** complains that she was not notified of account balances like the statements that credit card companies sendWe are not a credit card company and we do not have open-ended accounts that have fluctuating account balancesThe Agreement we have with Ms*** provides for a specific renewal payment that is automatically drafted from her bank account on specific datesMs*** could easily ascertain her account balance by looking at her Agreement and accounting for payments made, or by calling our Customer Service Department as instructed in April Ms***’ account has not been paid in fullShe has not yet even paid the retail price of the property purchasedIf she does not wish to continue to make her lease renewal payments, she may return our Property to us and we can terminate the AgreementIf she wishes to keep the Property, she must make her renewal payments until the end of the 12-month term, or exercise the Early Purchase OptionIf Ms*** has any questions or wishes to make a payment on her account, she may call the Customer Service Department at (801) 297-

Acima is an extremely incompetently run organization that makes erroneous withdrawals from your checking account without the claimed means to refund. Regardless of your electronic/paper trail, they are professiinally ill-equipped to resolve in your favor and defer to excuses. They come across robotic and rehearsed in their response to any error on their part. They are not trustworthy with access to consumer money. They will force you to shut down your active checking account. The so-called Supervisors are inexperienced w/customer relations and continuously blame team members. Don't expect resolution & be weary of them accessing your hard earned funds!

Acima Credit, LLC (hereinafter “Acima,” “we,” “our,” “us”) received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on August 11, 2017. From the time we received Ms. [redacted]’s complaint we have been in contact with Ms. [redacted] in an effort to resolve her concerns and help her...

understand the nature of her Rental-Purchase Agreement (“Agreement”) with Acima. As of the date of this response, Ms. [redacted] has failed to understand our explanations of her contractual obligations. However, we will attempt to explain in this response her contractual obligations to Acima, and the nature of the Agreement. Acima is a virtual rent-to-own organization that provides alternative lease financing services to customers who may not qualify for traditional financing. We purchase household goods and rent them to customers who apply and are approved for our services. Acima offers only one lease model. Our lease model constitutes a 12-month lease of the property to the customer wherein the customer rents the property from Acima for a period of 12 months before acquiring ownership of the property through regularly scheduled lease renewal payments. As a courtesy to our customers, Acima offers two early purchase options (EPOs); each of which reduces the cost of ownership to the customer, and terminates the Agreement earlier than the 12-month contractual term contained within the Agreement. On July 27, 2017, Ms. [redacted] entered into a Rental-Purchase Agreement with Acima wherein she ag[redacted] to rent four (4) used tires (the “Property”) that Acima purchased from All Starz Tires & Automotive (the “Merchant”), an independent third-party retailer, located in Orange Park, Florida. The terms of the Agreement provided that Ms. [redacted] would rent the Property from Acima for the duration of the 12-month lease by making 26 bi-weekly payments of $20.84 (not including tax) until she had made the Total of Payments due of $591.60, which would allow Ms. [redacted] to acquire ownership of the Property. If Ms. [redacted] wishes to exercise the 90-Day EPO, she must pay a total of $300.00 on or before October 25, 2017. Ms. [redacted] disputes the application of payments against the balance of her rent owed. She claims that she made a payment at the Merchant’s store and it was promised to be applied to her Total of Payments. Acima has properly applied the rental payments received.  Assuming Ms. [redacted] exercises the 90-day EPO option, she will have to pay the $300.00, less any other payments previously made to Acima.  If instead Ms. [redacted] elects to make regular rental payments throughout the life of her lease, she will have to pay $591.60, less any amounts previously paid to Acima.  In either case, Ms. [redacted] will receive credit for the amounts previously paid to Acima. Ms. [redacted] disputes the price of the property.  The Acima Cash Price, clearly stated in the third paragraph of Ms. [redacted]’s Agreement, is $290.00. The Acima Cash Price of $290.00 plus the 90-Day Buyout Fee of $10.00 results in the 90-Day Buyout Amount of $300.00. At the time she entered into the Agreement, Ms. [redacted] made an initial payment of $50.  The initial payment reduced the balance owed by Ms. [redacted] to $250.00 – assuming Ms. [redacted] pays exercises her 90-day EPO.  If she does not exercise her 90-day EPO, Ms. [redacted] received credit for the initial payment against the Total of Payments due of 591.60, leaving $541.60 remaining as of the date the Agreement was signed.  Any payments made by Ms. [redacted] since that time will be credited against the balance left owing – whether it be the 90-day balance, or the 12-month balance. Acima has spoken with Ms. [redacted] several times to explain our business model and calculations; nevertheless, she continues to request that we waive our fee of $50.00 and only charge her $10.00 for using our services. We appreciate Ms. [redacted]’s business; however we will not waive our $50.00 fee. Ms. [redacted] was provided with a copy of her Agreement prior to signing it. The Agreement clearly identifies the numerical amounts of all payments owed to Acima. As of the date of this letter, Ms. [redacted] still has the option to exercise her 90-Day EPO by paying $208.32 before the option expires on October 25, 2017. If Ms. [redacted] is unable to exercise the 90-Day EPO, she will be able to exercise the second EPO which allows her to pay the 75% of her remaining renewal payments to obtain ownership of the Property. If Ms. [redacted] desires to terminate the Agreement, she may do so by returning the property to us and paying the minimum lease requirement, as stated in paragraph 8. We look forward to hearing from Ms. [redacted] to discuss which of these proposed resolutions she desires to exercise. Pursuant to the Agreement, Ms. [redacted] is not allowed to maintain possession of the Property without paying the required payments as determined by the Agreement.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I was never shown the full price of mattress nor mentioned it was for full 12 months of finance, I had to sign my name using my finger on a tablet in which the full contract with those details were not printed at time of purchase. I had to call them to request a copy of such contract be emailed to me instead which I received couple weeks ago.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

On September 28, 2015, [redacted] entered JMD Furniture-Laurel, an independent merchant of Simple RTO, LLC (DBA: Simple Finance, hereinafter “Simple” or “us” or “we”), and filled out an application to lease various furniture items through Simple. On October 8, 2015 [redacted]...

electronically signed the “Lease Agreement with Right To Purchase” which describes therein the terms of damaged or loss of property and payment method authorization.Ms. [redacted] claimed, “Simple Finance has an active and open account for me,...which I did not authorize them to fund or begin.” On September 28, 2015, Ms. [redacted] applied for financing from Simple Finance in the merchant store JMD Furniture and was approved the same day. She electronically signed her Lease Agreement which did authorize the commencement of our agreement with her, opening an account. The lease was not funded until her items had been delivered, which was confirmed with the merchant store. Upon delivery and funding, her payment due dates were scheduled for her next pay date, but “no sooner than 7 days from the delivery date,” as stated in the Agreement.She also claimed, “I did not receive all the items I requested from my merchant, and second, the items that were delivered were damaged or missing pieces.” Ms. [redacted] did in fact receive her items from the merchant store, which the merchant confirmed with us the same day she called Simple Finance. She electronically signed the “Acknowledgement of Receipt of Leased Property and Satisfaction Receipt”, which states, in bold lettering, above the signature line, “BY SIGNING THIS RECEIPT: (1) YOU DECLARE YOU HAVE RECEIVED ALL LEASED PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE AGREEMENT;...(3) YOU DECLARE THAT YOU ARE SATISFIED WITH THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY;” In section 7, titled “Damage or Loss of Property”, it states, “If you notice any damages to the Property, other than those disclosed by us, you agree to inform us of the damages before signing and we will amend the agreement accordingly. By signing this lease, you agree that you are satisfied with the condition of the Property and that no other damages exist other than those disclosed by us.” Ms. [redacted] reported that she was given the incorrect pillow, so it was reordered and replaced promptly. Upon delivery and receipt of her merchandise there was no mention or complaint of any other missing or damaged items, nor in her first several phone conversations with us. There were multiple occasions in which Simple Finance was in communication with Ms. [redacted] and she never made any reference to a bed frame or desk drawer being damaged or missing until thirty-nine (39) days after delivery. When she did finally notify Simple Finance of “broken items” we requested pictures of her furniture. She sent pictures showing her purchased bed frame broken into eight (8) pieces. We do not believe it is reasonable to expect that a customer would sign for furniture being delivered to her house as being “satisfied with the condition of the property”, if it were delivered snapped into pieces. We believe that this damage was done intentionally in an attempt to avoid the contractual obligation to pay for her merchandise after having it in her possession, as of now, for over 90 days.Ms. [redacted] also said, that she never gave Simple Finance authorization to draft her minimum payments and “had to block [us] from [her] account.” In the ‘Lease Agreement” under section 8, titled “Payment Method/Payment Change, EFT Authorization”, it states, “You authorize us to initiate an electronic fund transfer (“EFT”) over the ACH network for any scheduled payment you owe under this Agreement…” Also, it is stated “You certify that you are an authorized user of the Bank Account and Card and will not dispute these scheduled transactions with your bank or credit card company; so long as the transactions correspond to the terms indicated in this authorization form. Simple Finance did have authorization to draft payments on their due date, according to the Lease Agreement which says payments are “due twice-monthly thereafter...commencing no sooner than 7 days from the delivery date.” The transactions did correspond to the terms indicated in the authorization form, Ms. [redacted] did violate the terms of her agreement by disputing and stopping payments from being taken from her account which caused her account to become delinquent and incur late fees. Our recovery team contacted Ms. [redacted] to discuss her options to get caught up on her payments in a reasonable and affordable manner. She had already had possession of the property for over 30 days at the time a payment plan was offered to her, as she had not yet made any payment towards her property.Ms. [redacted] also said, “I have taken off work numerous times to have these items delivered by the merchant who never showed up. I even called the merchant in November and asked to return the few items I did have and they informed me they will not take the items back.  This is unreasonable.”Although several items were not reported as damaged until a month after delivery, the merchant store was still willing to deliver new items according to the customer’s satisfaction. This delivery was confirmed with both the merchant store and customer on a three-way call with Simple Finance. On the scheduled delivery date, the customer did not answer her phone, nor return a call to the merchant and was not home when they attempted to deliver her items. We have email confirmation that she rescheduled the delivery herself. The merchant store has made three (3) attempted deliveries at their own expense (of $100 each delivery) on behalf of Ms. [redacted] and she has never been home to receive her items. This is not a legitimate business complaint. Ms. [redacted] is able to pick up her items at any time or schedule another delivery at her own expense as the merchant has already gone above and beyond in it’s efforts to satisfy her. Simple Finance has been compliant to the Lease Agreement which was entered into willingly by Ms. [redacted]. As the property has been in her possession for over 90 days, and she has not yet paid any amount towards her balance, Simple Finance will not close her account and she will be expected to pay for the merchandise she does have in her possession. Attached below is a copy of the signed Lease Agreement and corresponding pictures to the "damaged" merchandise.

The warranty Ms. [redacted] is referring to in her complaint, whether or not she called it a manufacturer’s warranty, is in fact, a manufacturer’s warranty. The Merchant did not go out of business. They have relocated to a new address. The address of the Merchant is [redacted] [redacted]. We encourage Ms. [redacted] to go to the new address and speak with the Merchant regarding the warranty process.   We have made note of Ms. [redacted]’s refusal to pay her contractual obligations. We have also ceased all communication with Ms. [redacted] via email and phone. Ms. [redacted]’s payment obligations will continue while she remains in possession of the property. Should Ms. [redacted] wish to honor the terms of her Agreement, she may contact us at (801) 297-1982.

Acima Credit, LLC (FKA: Simple Finance; hereinafter “Acima” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Mrs. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on March 22nd, 2017. We have investigated the allegations made and are prepared to provide all the facts surrounding the transaction to...

fully explain the nature of the Lease Agreement (“Agreement”) and the contractual obligations of Mrs. [redacted].Acima is a virtual rent-to-own organization that partners with retail merchants to provide alternative lease-purchase financing to those who may not qualify for traditional financing. On July 30th, 2016, Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] applied and were approved for our leasing services through an independent third-party, East Coast Appliance (the “Merchant”), located in Chesapeake, Virginia.  On this day, Acima purchased a washer and dryer (the “Property”) on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] for $1,453.05.  The Agreement is a 12-month lease of the Property to Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] at the cost of $119.88 semi-monthly.  The Agreement states the total of payments Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] would pay if they hold the lease for the entire lease term is $2,927.12.  The Agreement contains two (2) early purchase options (EPOs) available to Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] as a courtesy to terminate the lease prior to maturity to save some money.  The first EPO, the 90-Day EPO, states that Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] can pay a total of $1,513.05 including the retail price of the Property, a $50.00 initial payment, and a $10.00 account closure fee to terminate the account within the first 90 days of the lease.  Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]’s 90-Day EPO expired on November 16th, 2016.  The second EPO stipulates the lease can be terminated at any time following the 90-Day EPO expiration date by paying 75% of the remaining periodic lease payments, plus any other charges.  In her complaint, Mrs. [redacted] complains about the “interest rate” associated with the Agreement.  Acima does not charge an interest rate because the Agreement is a 12-month lease of the Property.  Leases require a cost for using the Property and the cost is reflected in the total of payments Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] would pay by holding the lease to term.  Acima imposes a one-time financing charge in our Agreements at the time the Agreement is generated for our customers.  By signing the Agreement, Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] assumed the finance charge associated with renting the Property.  If Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] wish to avoid a percentage of the financing charge, they must exercise the second EPO discount available to them.  Mrs. [redacted] alleges she was not given a copy of the Agreement at the time she signed the Agreement.  Acima was not present at the time of signing and can neither confirm nor deny this claim.  The Agreement was signed electronically through our Merchant Portal using a code sent to her via email and text message.  Mrs. [redacted] was notified within these messages that using the code is equivalent to physically signing the Agreement.  The Merchant Portal contains the Agreement in its entirety available for viewing and printing prior to signing.  Mrs. [redacted] must request a physical copy of the Agreement at the time of signing if she wanted to have a copy for her records.  Additionally, we have record of sending the Agreement and a Welcome Letter to Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]’s residence by USPS on August 25th, 2016.  Because the documents were not returned to us by the USPS, we had no reason to believe Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] did not receive the Agreement and Welcome Letter.  Mrs. [redacted] claims in her complaint that regular lease renewal payments can “only… be paid through bank drafts.”  Acima initially establishes automatic ACH payments to be drafted from our customer’s checking accounts according to their paycheck schedule.  We also allow our customers to authorize a credit or debit card as their primary payment method in lieu of ACH payments.  If Mrs. [redacted] wishes to change her primary payment method, she may do so at any time by calling our Customer Service Department. Mrs. [redacted] has issued a stop payment on her bank account without providing an alternative payment method to make her regular lease renewal payments.  As stated on Section 3 of the Agreement, Acima owns the Property.  Mrs. [redacted] is not permitted to keep the Property without making her regular lease renewal payments.  Mrs. [redacted] must call our Customer Service Department to establish a regular payment schedule or exercise the second EPO.  If Mrs. [redacted] no longer finds the terms of the Agreement desireable, she maintains the right to terminate the Agreement by returning the Property to us and paying any applicable outstanding balances.  We hope Mrs. [redacted] finds our explanation satisfactory, and we hope to continue doing business with her.  If Mrs. [redacted] requires further information or wishes to resolve her account issues, we encourage her to call our Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Simple RTO received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on October 20, 2016. We have investigated the complaint and discovered that Ms. [redacted] was denied from out program. Therefore, she is not one of our customers. Since Ms. [redacted] is not our customer, we...

are unable to disclose any information pertaining to the specific reasons for her denial. Our processes in ascertaining whether an individual will qualify for our program are trade secrets within the industry, so you will understand our inability to disclose such information.             Ms. [redacted] alleges, “I was shortly advised that I was denied due to bank accounts recently closed in fraud-which is 100 percent incorrect, and that there were too many credit inquired.” “Simple Finance did false advertising to well qualified customers.” We discovered through a third-party database that the Ms. [redacted] did in fact have 2 bank account closures within the last 3 years, and that she had inquired within the last 30 days about opening a new bank account. These factors significantly increase the risk of potentially doing business with Ms. [redacted], and therefore contributed to her denial. The database we obtained this information from merely suggested that the account closures were related to fraud, and the “credit inquiry” was the inquiry for a new bank account – it is not disclosed whether it was for credit or otherwise. Additionally, Ms. [redacted] had submitted two applications with inconsistent information, one of which was cancelled before a final decision was made. This also contributed to the risk factor related to Ms. [redacted]’s consumer history. Our approvals and denials are based on more than simply having the qualified income, employment, and a bank account. Once again, our processes in approving or denying a customer are proprietary information and cannot be disclosed. Ms. [redacted] is more than welcome to reapply for our program in 30-90 days.

Check fields!

Write a review of Acima Credit

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by adding a photo

Acima Credit Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Address: 9815 S Monroe St Fl 4, Sandy, Utah, United States, 84070-4296

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

This website was reported to be associated with Acima Credit.




Add contact information for Acima Credit

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated