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 Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on March 31, 2017. We have investigated the allegations made and are prepared to provide all the facts surrounding the transaction to...

fully explain the allegations in Ms. [redacted]’s complaint.Ms. [redacted]’s regular lease renewal payments were arranged to match her paycheck schedule.  Ms. [redacted] authorized Acima to draft payments from her bank account on file on the 15th and last day of every month.  On March 30, 2017, Acima’s payment system malfunctioned and drafted Ms. [redacted]’s regular lease renewal payment early.  This resulted in a $27.00 overdraft fee.  Since this event, we have contacted Ms. [redacted] and resolved the situation.  We will be issuing a refund of $27.00 today, April 7, 2017.  Refunds generally take up to 10 business days to post to our customer’s bank account based on the ACH network and the customer’s banking institution.  Ms. [redacted] has been an excellent customer to us and we hope she finds this solution satisfactory.  If Ms. [redacted] requires or desires further information regarding her account, we welcome her to call our Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Acima Credit, LLC (hereinafter “Acima,” “we,” “us,” “our”) received a complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on April 17, 2018.  We have investigated the allegations and have prepared a response to explain the nature of the Lease-Purchase Agreement (the...

“Agreement”) and the contractual obligations of Mr. [redacted]. Acima is a virtual rent-to-own company offering alternative financing for those who may not qualify for traditional financing.  Acima offers only one lease model, which is a 12-month lease. The Acima lease program allows the customer to select property from an independent third-party merchant and Acima purchases the property from the merchant.  The customer takes the possession of the property and leases it from Acima until all the scheduled payments have been made. After all payments have been made, the Agreement is satisfied and the customer owns the property.  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 satisfies the Agreement earlier than the 12-month contractual term contained within the Agreement. The first option is a 90-Day EPO.  This option allows our customers to purchase the property within the first 90 days of the Agreement at the finvoice price, plus a $40.00 initial payment, and a $10.00 account closure fee (the “Acima Cash Price”).  The second EPO stipulates that a customer may terminate the Agreement at any time after the first 90 days of the Agreement by paying a lump sum equivalent to 75% of the remaining lease renewal payments. To exercise either EPO, a customer must call Acima’s Customer Service Department or access our online customer portal to initiate the payoff process.  Acima will not initiate the EPO payoff without appropriate consent from the customer because such action would necessarily require Acima to violate the terms of the Agreement by withdrawing more than the regularly scheduled payment amount from the customer’s preferred payment method. Acima uses an advanced authentication method in which most Agreements are entered into electronically.  We initiate an SMS text message to our customers’ cell phones containing a unique identification code to be used as the customers electronic signature and official authorization of the Agreement.  Acima sent an SMS text message to Mr. [redacted]’s cell phone on January 8, 2018 at 3:43 PM MST. The message said, “Notice! Using this code is equal to physically signing you lease agreement with Acima. Code: [redacted] (Reply STOP to unsubscribe)”.  Mr. [redacted] then used the code and entered into the Agreement to rent a set of four tires (the “Property”) through 24 semi-monthly of $118.61 and a down payment of $125.33 for a total of $2,886.60 (the “Total of Payments”). Mr. [redacted] alleges that he did not have the opportunity to see the Agreement prior to signing and that we sent the signed Agreement to the wrong person.  The electronic signing process allows for the customer to view and print the Agreement prior to signing. Additionally, Ms. [redacted] could have called Acima at any time and requested a copy of the unsigned Agreement prior to or after signing.  Acima mailed a physical copy of the Agreement to Mr. [redacted] at the address listed on his application. Mr. [redacted] failed to exercise his 90-Day EPO within the designated time period or the extension period.  As Mr. [redacted] was told by our agent on April 17, he may exercise his second EPO to terminate the Agreement early.  As of the date of this response, Mr. [redacted]’s second EPO balance is $1,601.20. Mr. [redacted] alleges we have provided “false information” to him.  We have not misrepresented the Agreement or our services. Acima is a rent-to-own company, not a traditional financing company.  We have accurately and completely explained the Agreement, our terms, and the events behind the commencement of the Agreement. We hope this explanation of the Agreement and its terms have clarified Mr. [redacted]’s complaint.  We appreciate Mr. [redacted]’s business and look forward to working with him. If Mr. [redacted] has remaining questions, or wishes to exercise his second EPO, he may call our Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Acima Credit, LLC received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com (Revdex.com) on May 15, 2018 regarding her lease-purchase agreement. We have reached out to Ms. [redacted] and are working with her to resolve the matter outside of the Revdex.com. It is our understanding...

that Ms. [redacted] is satisfied with our proposed resolution.

Acima Credit, LLC (hereafter “Acima”) received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on September 8, 2017. We have prepared a response below to the complaint at hand and have proposed several resolutions that are fair to both parties.   On September 1,...

2017 Ms. [redacted] called Acima to notify us that her payment would return unpaid because she had changed her bank account information due to privacy issues. However, on this date, the regular payment of $98.56 had already been processed via ACH. We advised Ms. [redacted] to call us back in approximately 7 days, which is how long it can take the ACH network to return a payment to us. Ms. [redacted] was told that we could discuss late fees once the payment had returned and get another payment method to make up for the missed payment.   Ms. [redacted] contact Acima as instructed and was told that she would be charged a late fee for her missed payment. However, Ms. [redacted] had been proactive in notifying Acima about her missed payment and quickly updated her payment information. She paid the late renewal payment plus a late fee of $28.00. Ms. [redacted] was correct in notifying us via the Revdex.com of this incident so that we might correct it.   We are sorry for the miscommunication between Acima’s departments regarding the assessment of the late fees to Ms. [redacted]’s account. She has been an outstanding customer with a great payment history and we greatly appreciate her business. We have credited the $28.00 to Ms. [redacted]’s account which reduces the amount of her next renewal payment due on September 29th. Her next renewal payment amount will be $70.56 due on September 29th. After this payment date, her renewal payments will return to the amount of $98.56 due every-other-week.   In addition to crediting Ms. [redacted]’s account, we will not report her account as delinquent to any credit bureau. Her account will be reported correctly, and as of the date of this response, her account is current. We hope Ms. [redacted] is satisfied with our response and resolution. For any further questions regarding her account, Ms. [redacted] may contact the Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Simple RTO, LLC (DBA: Simple Finance, hereinafter “Simple” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on July 2, 2016. We have investigated the allegations made in the complaint regarding the integrity of the transaction that occurred between...

an independent third-party merchant, Simple, and Mr. [redacted], 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. [redacted]. Simple 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 January 14, 2016, Mr. [redacted] applied and was approved for the leasing services of Simple through and independent third-party--Mattress By Appointment (the “Merchant”) --located in St. George, UT. Upon approving Mr. [redacted]’s application, Simple initiated an SMS text message to Mr. [redacted] containing a four-digit personal identification number (the “PIN”) to be used as Mr. [redacted]’s electronic authorization of the Agreement. Mr. [redacted] provided the PIN number to the Merchant’s associate who used it to accept and acknowledge the Agreement on behalf of Mr. [redacted]. When the PIN was returned to Simple, a pre-designed signature baring the name of Mr. [redacted] was populated on the Agreement to indicate that the Agreement had been authorized electronically[1]. The Agreement identifies the Total Payments and Early Purchase Options (“EPO”). It states, “The total of your payments will be $2145.76 (“Total 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 the 90-Day Option amount, $1113.50.;” and the second EPO, “After ninety (90) days…you may purchase the Property by paying seventy-five (75%) percent of the total remaining periodic lease payments…” When the 90-Day Option expired on April 13, 2016, Mr. [redacted] had paid $526.44 in lease renewal payments. If Mr. [redacted] had paid $1113.50 by April 13th, he would have acquired ownership of the property by exercising his 90-Day Option. Because Mr. [redacted] did not exercise the 90-Day Option, he is bound to the terms of the Agreement which require that he pay the Total Payments of $2145.76, or exercise the second EPO available to him.[1] Pursuant to the ESIGN Act of 2000, a contract may not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability solely because an electronic signature was used in its formation.   Mr. [redacted] stated his desired settlement is for Simple to “have the interest removed.” The Agreement clearly explains the Total Payments to acquire ownership of the property is $2145.76. The 90-Day Option is a courtesy provided to customers which allows them to pay off the Agreement early. Although Simple strives to satisfy all customers by providing them excellent service, we do not negotiate the terms of our Lease-Purchase Agreements. We purchased the property from the Merchant and we are renting that property to Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] does not own the property and cannot negotiate a reduction in the Total Payments because he does not find the terms desirable anymore. If Mr. [redacted] wishes to keep his property, he will be required to honor his Agreement and continue making timely lease renewal payments of $175.48 every month until the Total Payments has been paid, or exercise the second EPO by paying 75% of the total remaining periodic lease payments. If Mr. [redacted] does not wish to keep making his lease renewal payments, then he has the right to opt-out of his Agreement by returning our property to us. In no situation may he keep our property and not make the lease renewal payments. We look forward to hearing from Mr. [redacted] to discuss his options once he decides whether or not he wishes to keep the property. [1] Pursuant to the ESIGN Act of 2000, a contract may not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability solely because an electronic signature was used in its formation.

We have received Mr. [redacted]’s rejection on behalf of Ms. [redacted]. We have further investigated the arrangements mentioned in our previous response and have come to a resolution. We have confirmed that as of Friday, November 11, 2016, the merchandise that Ms. [redacted] did not wish to keep has been picked up. Mr. [redacted] claims that he and Ms. [redacted] had paid $300 toward the other merchandise that we are leasing to them. Although we have no record of that payment, we have decided in good faith to close their lease and allow them to keep the remaining merchandise. No refund will be administered to Ms. [redacted], and nothing is owed to us by her. We look forward to doing business with her in the future.

Simple RTO, LLC (DBA: Simple Finance, hereinafter “Simple” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on July 7, 2016. We have investigated the complaint in every detail and intend to explain with more clarity, the contractual obligations of...

Ms. [redacted], and the resolution that Simple agrees to. Simple 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 February 22, 2016, Ms. [redacted] was approved for the leasing services of Simple through an independent third-party—Sandys Furniture (the “Merchant”) –located in Elyria, OH. Upon approval, Ms. [redacted] signed the “Lease Agreement with Right to Purchase” (“Agreement”), which describes therein the Early Purchase Option by which she may acquire ownership of the Property. Simple purchased a queen bed, dresser, mirror, chest, and night stand (the “Property”) from the Merchant and leased the Property to Ms. [redacted] through a twelve (12) month Agreement wherein Ms. [redacted] agreed to pay $3,970.36 for ownership of the Property through monthly payments of $327.53. The Agreement identifies the Total Payments and Early Purchase Options (“EPO”). Specifically, the Agreement states, “[t]he total of your payments will be $3,970.36 (“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; the first EPO, called the 90-Day Option, which states “You may choose to purchase the Property at any time during the first ninety (90) days of this Agreement by paying the 90-Day Option amount, $2035.00.;” and the second EPO, which states that “[a]fter (90) days…you may purchase the Property by paying seventy-five (75%) percent of the total remaining periodic lease payments…” When the 90-Day Option expired on May 22, 2016, Ms. [redacted] had paid $1655.59 in lease renewal payments (she still owed $339.41 to pay the full 90-Day Option). Ms. [redacted] claims in her complaint that she called Simple on May 3rd and was told by a representative she had “one more payment left on June 2.” Simple does not have any record of a phone call taking place on May 3rd and cannot confirm any conversation from that day. However, Ms. [redacted] did call Simple on May 1st to make an additional payment of $345.47 which shows that Ms. [redacted] understood that it was necessary to call Simple to make additional payments that were not regularly scheduled automatic drafts of her minimum monthly payment of $327.53. Ms. [redacted] is responsible for understanding her contractual obligations and the deadlines for exercising EPOs. If Ms. [redacted] had paid $1995.00 by May 22nd, she would have acquired ownership of the Property by exercising her 90-Day Option.  Ten (10) days after the 90-Day Option deadline, Ms. [redacted] made a payment of $327.53 to make the total amount paid $1983.12 and leaving the remaining balance of $11.88 to satisfy the 90-Day Buyout Amount. Simple strives to satisfy all customers by providing them excellent service, and offers a 90-Day Option deadline extension up to 10 days for a fee of 10% of the 90-Day Buyout Amount as stated in the Agreement. The 90-Day Buyout Amount stated in her Lease Agreement is $1995.00, making the 10% extension fee $199.50. Ms. [redacted] has been an excellent customer with perfect payment history, therefore, Simple will retroactively extend the 90-Day Option deadline from May 22, 2016 for 10 days, until June 1, 2016, for a fee of $199.50. On July 1, 2016 Ms. [redacted] made a payment of $327.53 which Simple will use towards the 10% fee, and the remaining balance of $11.88, and refund her the remaining balance of $116.15. Ms. [redacted] may exercise her 90-Day Option by paying the 10% deadline extension fee. There be no further payments necessary to satisfy the lease. We hope that this measure of good faith exercised will result in an amicable solution that is satisfactory to Ms. [redacted]. She has been an excellent customer and we look forward to doing business with her in the future.

On January 12,2018, Acima Credit, LLC (hereinafter “Acima,” “we,” “us,” “our”) received a complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com. We have investigated the allegations and have prepared a response to explain the nature of the Lease-Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”)...

and the contractual obligations for Ms. [redacted].  Acima is a virtual rent-to-own company offering alternative financing for those who may not qualify for traditional financing.  Acima’s Agreements and procedures were developed under and abide by the “Lease-Purchase Agreement Act” of Georgia (Georgia Code Ann., § 10-1-680), which is where Ms. [redacted] lives and entered into the Agreement.  Acima offers only one lease model, which is a 12-month lease. Under the Acima lease program, a customer selects property from an independent third-party merchant, and Acima purchases that property from the merchant. The customer takes the property and leases it from Acima until all of the scheduled payments have been made. After all the payments have been made, the Agreement has been satisfied and the customer owns the property.  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 satisfies the Agreement earlier than the 12-month contractual term contained within the Agreement. In this case, Ms. [redacted] did not exercise either one of these options. On August 15, 2017, Ms. [redacted] entered the Agreement to rent 2 twin beds, bed frames, a marble table, four stools, and a bench (the “Property”) from Acima. On November 3, 2017, Ms. [redacted] called Acima to report that her chairs needed repairs. Our agent advised Ms. [redacted] to call Eat, Sleep, and Sit (the “Merchant”) to request repairs, otherwise she must find her own repair service to fix the chairs. As stated in Paragraph 7 of Ms. [redacted]’s Agreement, Ms. [redacted] is “responsible for maintaining the Property in good working condition during the lease term… we do not provide any Warranty of Merchantability of Fitness for a Particular Purpose, either Express or Implied, on the Property.” Acima is not responsible for maintaining the Property during the lease term.   Additionally, under Paragraph 9 of the Agreement, Ms. [redacted] has the right to terminate the Agreement by “returning the Property [to Acima] in accordance with our directions, and by paying us any unpaid Renewal Payments, plus Other Charges due, including any damage to the Property, beyond normal wear and tear.” On November 28, Ms. [redacted] called Acima to ask for the instructions to return the Property. Acima sent the instructions via email requesting that Ms. [redacted] send pictures of all the Property to initiate the return. Ms. [redacted] sent pictures of the table, chairs, and bench, but not the twin beds. In order to initiate the return process, Acima requires pictures of all the Property, as Acima does not do partial returns to terminate the whole contract. Rather, the customer has two options: 1) the customer may pay the remaining amount due on an EPO or on the total amount remaining on the Agreement to acquire ownership of the Property to discharge any liability of Acima in order to sell or dispose of the Property; or 2) return all Property contained in the Agreement and pay any outstanding charges or renewal payments on the account, with a minimum lease term of 60 days worth of renewal payments.  On December 5, 2017, Acima offered to settle Ms. [redacted]’s remaining liabilities on the Agreement for a total of $550.00 plus tax. Ms. [redacted] accepted this offer, and agreed to pay the settlement amount in two installments: $100 plus tax on December 18, 2017 and $450 plus tax on January 19, 2018. Ms. [redacted] paid the first payment of the settlement plan on December 18, 2017. On January 5, 2018 she charged the payment back to her account. Charging back the payment terminated the settlement plan.  It is worth noting that the settlement plan did not even cover the original invoice price that Acima paid to the Merchant for the Property. The Merchant’s invoice price was $1,957.08, and, including the settlement plan payments (if made), Ms. [redacted] would have only paid a total of $1306.36, plus tax, to terminate the Agreement and keep all the Property. As of the date of the settlement offer, Ms. [redacted] had paid $756.36 toward the balance on the Agreement. If Ms. [redacted] elects to keep the Property and make all the payments, her total of payments to obtain ownership of the Property is $3,531.72. If Ms. [redacted] would like to return the Property, she must return all of the Property in order to terminate the entire Agreement. Because the Agreement constitutes a lease of the Property, Ms. [redacted] is responsible for paying for the amount of time she has had possession of the Property, including the loss of any value to the Property due to damage beyond normal wear and tear. Ms. [redacted] does not own the Property, thus she cannot keep the Property and withhold lease renewal payments. If Ms. [redacted] would like to initiate a return of the Property, she may call our Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982 to receive instructions and obtain a remaining balance owed.

Acima Credit, LLC (hereinafter “Acima,” “us,” “we,” “our”) received a complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on April 30, 2018.  We have investigated the allegations and prepared a response to explain the nature of the Lease-Purchase Agreement (the...

“Agreement”) and the contractual obligations of Ms. [redacted]. Acima is a virtual rent-to-own company offering alternative financing for those who may not qualify for traditional financing.  Acima offers only one lease model, which is a 12-month lease. The Acima lease program allows the customer to select property from an independent third-party merchant and Acima Purchases the property from the merchant.  The customer takes possession of the property and leases it from Acima until all the scheduled lease renewal payments have been made. After all payments have been made, the Agreement is satisfied and the customer owns the property.  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 satisfies the Agreement earlier than the 12-month contractual term contained within the Agreement.  The first option is a 90-Day EPO.  This option allows our customers to purchase the property within the first 90 days of the Agreement at the invoice price, plus a $50.00 initial payment, and a $10.00 account closure fee (the “Acima Cash Price”).  The second EPO stipulates that a customer may terminate the Agreement at any time after the first 90 days of the Agreement by paying a lump sum equivalent to 75% of the remaining lease renewal payments. To exercise either EPO, a customer must call Acima’s Customer Service Department to initiate the payoff process.  Acima will not initiate an EPO payoff without appropriate consent from the customer because such action would necessarily require Acima to violate the terms of the Agreement by withdrawing more than the regularly scheduled payment amount from the customer’s preferred payment method. Acima uses an advanced authentication method in which most Agreements are entered into electronically.  We initiate an SMS text message to our customers’ cell phones containing a unique identification code to be used as the customers’ electronic signature and official authorization of the Agreement.  Acima sent an SMS text message to Ms. [redacted]’s cell phone on January 20, 2018 at 2:51 PM MST. The message said, “Notice! Using this code is equal to physically signing your lease agreement with Acima. Code: [redacted] (Reply STOP to unsubscribe).”  Ms. [redacted] then used the code and entered into the Agreement to rent three twin bed sets (the “Property”) through 52 weekly payments of $26.36 plus a $50.00 initial payment for a total of $1,420.35 (the “Total of Payments”). Ms. [redacted] alleges we provided her the wrong information and had incorrect information listed on her account.  Acima keeps detailed records of all communications with customers to ensure consistent and accurate conversations between agents and customers.  All of the information listed on Ms. [redacted]’s account is that information provided by her to Acima on her application. On January 20, 2018 at 3:32 PM, an Acima agent called Ms. [redacted]’s cell phone and verified her contact information, paycheck dates, and expected delivery dates of the Property.  We have record of Ms. [redacted] receiving our welcome email after signing the Agreement. The welcome email contains the Agreement and a letter listing the 90-Day EPO expiration date. Ms. [redacted]’s 90-Day EPO expired on April 22, 2018. If Ms. [redacted] did not receive this email due to an inaccurate email listed on her account, it is no fault by Acima.  Acima exercised adequate due diligence in ascertaining Ms. [redacted]’s contact information during the verification call on January 20th. Ms. [redacted] called Acima on April 30, 2018 and was informed her 90-Day EPO had expired.  As a customer service courtesy to Ms. [redacted], our agent offered her an extension to exercise her 90-Day EPO for an additional fee of $100.00.  Ms. [redacted] refused this offer. Ms. [redacted] has threatened to chargeback all payments and demands Acima to refund all money collected from her.  Should she chargeback her payments, she will be in violation of the Agreement and subject to penalty fees. As stipulated under the Agreement, “WE OWN THE PROPERTY. This Agreement is a lease… You do not have the right to keep the Property if you do not make timely Renewal payments.”  Ms. [redacted] has options available to her to terminate the Agreement.  She may continue making payments on the Property until the end of the Agreement, exercise her second EPO, or return the Property to Acima in accordance with Paragraph 10 of the Agreement and pay any outstanding charges due.  If Ms. [redacted] wishes to pursue any of these options, or has additional questions about her Agreement, she may call our Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Acima Credit, LLC (FKA: Simple Finance; hereinafter “Acima” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on March 16, 2017. We have investigated the allegations made and are prepared to provide all the facts surrounding the transaction to...

fully explain the allegations in Ms. [redacted]’s complaint.Mr. [redacted]’s first payment toward her lease was originally scheduled to be due on April 3, 2017.  Ms. [redacted] called Acima on February 28, 2017 requesting we change her payment dates from the third of every month to the fourth of every month.  We obliged and informed Ms. [redacted] that April 4th is a Saturday.  Acima does not draft payment on Saturdays, so we scheduled Ms. [redacted]’s payment of $311.50 to be drafted on April 6th, 2017.  Our agent made a mistake and drafted Ms. [redacted]’s payment of $311.50 on March 6th rather than April 6th.  We acknowledge this was Acima’s mistake and apologize to Ms. [redacted] for the inconvenience.  A full refund of the $311.50 has been processed as of March 16th, 2017.  If Ms. [redacted] requires or desires further information, we welcome her to call our Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Simple Finance acknowledges Mr. [redacted]’s rejection to our proposed resolution. Unfortunately, there is not another option available to him at this time as he is legally bound by the contract he electronically signed with us. As stated in our last response, there may have been some leeway with respect to the 90-day Buyout deadline had he been current on his payments. However, since he has not submitted any payments to us for this lease (except for his initial payment), we are unable to offer him any other options other than what is stated in his contract.  Mr. [redacted] may 1) initiate a catch-up plan and allow this Agreement to proceed to term, 2) return our property and pay the daily lease rate for the days he has held the property, or 3) exercise his remaining Early Payoff Option.  The remaining Early Payoff Option is clearly described in his Agreement.  It states that Mr. [redacted] “may purchase the Property by paying seventy-five (75%) percent of the total remaining periodic lease payments, plus any other charges.” As of December 19, 2016, Mr. [redacted]’s Early Payoff Option amount is $1,066.32. He must pay this amount in one lump sum to take advantage of his remaining Early Payoff Option.  Mr. [redacted] may also return our property and pay for the days he held our property, or he may contact our Collections Department at 801-297-1983 to initiate a catch-up plan based off of the full lease amount.

Acima Credit, LLC (“Acima”) received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on December 11, 2017, regarding her Lease-Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) with Acima. We have prepared a response to Ms. [redacted]’s claims and will address the facts related to the Agreement...

and Ms. [redacted]’s contractual obligations contained therein.   In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] claimed that she was given a loan for $650.00 and has since paid a total of $720.00 toward her ‘loan.” However, Acima does not engage in lending and we do not offer loans. Acima is a virtual rent-to-own organization that offers alternative financing to consumers who may not qualify for traditional financing. Acima offers only one lease model. Our lease model constitutes a 12-month lease of the property to customers 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 lease.   Our first EPO is our 90-Day EPO. This option allows our customers to purchase the property at the invoice price, plus a $50.00 initial lease payment and a $10.00 account closure fee, within the first 90 days of the Agreement. The 90-Day EPO is our most affordable option. In this case, the second EPO stipulates that Ms. [redacted] may terminate the Agreement at any time after the first 90 days by paying a lump sum equivalent to 50% of the remaining lease renewal payments.   On March 10, 2017, Ms. [redacted] entered an independent third-party retailer – Eyes on Lex (the “Merchant”) – located in New York, New York. Ms. [redacted] applied and was approved for Acima’s leasing services and entered into a Lease-Purchase Agreement with Acima wherein she agreed to rent glasses and lenses (the “Property”) for the duration of a 12-month lease by making 24 twice-monthly payments of $48.37 for a total of $1210.88 (the “Total of Payments”).   The Agreement states these terms clearly, “...lease payments of $48.37 are due twice-monthly... The total of your payments will be $1210.88 (“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…” The Agreement also states, “Early Purchase Options: 90-Day Buyout: You may choose to purchase the Property at any time during the first ninety (90) days of this Agreement by paying $629.00 (“90-Day Buyout”). The 90-Day Buyout amount equals the Acima Cash Price, plus a 90-Day Buyout Fee of $10.00, minus any periodic lease payments you have made, plus any other charges. Early Payoff: After ninety (90) days of this Agreement, you may purchase the Property by paying fifty (50%) percent of the total remaining periodic lease payments, plus any other charges.”   The 90-Day EPO expired on June 11, 2017, at which point Ms. [redacted] had paid a total of $267.84 toward the 90-Day Buyout Amount of $629.00 that was due. Ms. [redacted] did not exercise her 90-Day EPO. As of the date of this response, Ms. [redacted] has paid a total of $898.16 toward the Total of Payments of $1,210.64. She has a remaining Total of Payments of $312.48. If she were to exercise her second EPO (purchasing the Property by paying 50% of the remaining total of payments) today, the payoff amount would be $133.92.   Ms. [redacted]’s desired resolution to her complaint is to have the remaining balance dismissed because she believes she has paid the ‘loan’ in full. As previously explained, Ms. [redacted] does not have a loan with Acima, and she has a remaining balance due. We will not dismiss the remaining Total of Payments.     Once Ms. [redacted] has paid the Total of Payments, or exercises the second EPO, she will have purchased the Property and acquired ownership of it. If Ms. [redacted] wishes to terminate her Agreement, she may do so by returning the Property to us. To utilize either of her options, Ms. [redacted] may contact Acima’s Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Simple Finance received the complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] on November 25, 2016. We have reviewed the complaint, his agreement with us, and all the notes regarding his contact with us. Mr. [redacted] states: “…Simple Finance didn’t take my payment as we agreed on November 4th of 2016.” Simple...

Finance received a phone call from Mr. [redacted] on October 17th to inform us that he would not be able to make his scheduled payment on October 25th, and to request an extension. The representative who spoke with Mr. [redacted] advised him that since he had not made any payments on his account, he was ineligible for a deadline extension. Mr. [redacted] stated that he would be able to make a payment of $677.00 on November 4th. The representative advised Mr. [redacted] that at that time he will be past his 90-day deadline, and his lease pay-off amount will then be $1,421.76. Mr. [redacted] called again on November 4th wanting to pay $677.00 to close his account. He was advised that since he is past his 90-day deadline, a payment of $677.00 would not be sufficient to close his account, but that it could be applied to the current balance of $1,421.76. Mr. [redacted] then stated that he would need to speak to his attorney first and ended the call without making that payment of $677.00. The Agreement that Mr. [redacted] signed outlines his options to purchase the merchandise as follows: “Early Purchase Options: 90-Day Buyout: You may choose to purchase the Property at any time during the first ninety (90) days of this Agreement by paying $726.00 ("90-Day Buyout"). The 90-Day Buyout amount equals the Simple Cash Price, plus a 90-Day Buyout Fee of $0.00, minus any periodic lease payments you have made, plus any other charges. Early Payoff: After ninety (90) days of this Agreement, you may purchase the Property by paying seventy-five (75%) percent of the total remaining periodic lease payments, plus any other charges. You must be current in your payments to exercise an early purchase option.” Mr. [redacted] would like to pay the 90-Day Buyout amount even though that option has expired. Normally, we will consider a request to extend the 90-Day Buyout when the customer is current. Unfortunately, Mr. [redacted] has not made any payments on his account. At this time, Mr. [redacted] has the option of paying $1,066.32 (75% of $1,421.76) to buy out his lease early, or he may call our Customer Service Department at 801.297.1982 to initiate a catch-up plan to bring his account current and resume payments for the full lease term.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: The last response is completely incorrect.Acima Says: "Firstly, as mentioned before, the customer is allowed to view the contract at the time the PIN in the text message is received on the customer’s cell phone.  The Portal the Merchant (Furniture Queen) uses to enter the code and sign the lease contains the Agreement in full for viewing and printing purposes.  Ms. [redacted] was not obligated to sign the Agreement immediately following the receipt of the PIN text message."^ There is NOTHING, not ONE piece of information about me being in affiliation with any contract, Acima, nor any payment plan at all on www.furniturequeen.com portal. Revdex.com- Please see attached info to login to my personal portal to see first hand that this is clearly not true. The entire complaint is based around the company reporting false information, as seen here, and that their wording is misleading. Here we see they are saying that it was now the merchant themselves that had me sign the agreement over the phone, that too, is incorrect. I was on the phone with Simple Finance (now ACIMA) when that "contract" (which was sent as PDF in the last complaint) was "signed". Acima also says, "Secondly, Acima did send a hard copy of the Agreement to Ms. [redacted] at the address she listed on her application.  She later mentioned she was unable to receive mail at the listed address as she had moved.  It is the customer’s responsibility to report address changes to us.  A copy of the Agreement is attached and sensitive information has been redacted for security purposes."^ Now as I mentioned in my first message of complaint that they dissected entirely, yet chose to not address this-  " Because what they did was, have me approve the loan thinking it was going to be 90 days, and "mail" a contract to an address that I no longer lived at, and I had JUST changed my address with them because I had JUST moved."  It was my responsibility, and I took care of it. Please see my attached PDF's to login to my Furniture Queen portal that this company is absolutely full of it. The attached document they sent was not given to me until my phone call with this company on February 7th, 2017. At that point it was immediately e-mailed (which they could have done prior to, yet did not)   I also have evidence of my documented move, forwarding address request and if need-be the information from the old land lord that I had access to my mail at the apartment listed until June 30, 2016. Acima did not send this information out... as mentioned in several previous complaints on their company. There is a reason they keep it electronically and send it VIA mail. There is no true record. They can stick to their claim that they have sent it, they can stick to their claim that the customer relieved it, but they have no evidence to prove that as they would with e-mail. If any customer got that contract and saw they would pay the company twice as much for the furniture if they didn't pay by "X" date, they would jump hoops to make that happen. If you pulled my credit report you would see I ALWAYS make extra payments to any minimum payment due. I am continuing to this date to pay this dreadful company. Acima is able to take advantage of customers by:1.) Not informing customer that there is a huge penalty if the "early 90 day buy out" isn't done before you sign the contract OR after for that matter.2.) Preform any and all services electronically, yet not provide a portal to view your account(- balances, payments, etc.) nor allow you to view your contract electronically. 3.) Not send the customer the real contract out, or if they do, VIA mail so that there is no way of tracking that the customer ever actually received the information.4.) Lead you to believe you can set-up automatic payment plans that work for you over the phone, yet then tell you no. They do not allow you to set the automatic payment that they draft out, to ensure you pay off in the 90 days.5.) They do not send monthly statements of your payment history, remaining balances, etc. Via mail, as they state it is in effort to save paper.     I will continue to fight until this company is reprimanded for doing bad business. They have clearly taken advantage of too many customers as they have them in this contract blindly. I will pay my fees "due" and I have not caused the company any problems. With that said, I will not call the company back; as their representative told me there was absolutely nothing they could do for me.  Therefor, I will continue providing any and all information to expose this fraudulent company.  
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I haven't had any bank closures due to fraud. Also, my recent bank inquiry was to open a SECOND account for a bank I already use to have TWO accounts with them and I was approved. Furthermore, when they say I can reapply in 30-90 days what does that do? If they are going to come back with the same rebuttal.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:dining set is damaged (2 chairs).  Acima wants me to pay for leasing furniture.  If I am to return all furniture including beds, I must start over and spend more money to replace this furniture.  I owe Acima nothing for so called leasing defected furniture.  I will like this to go to arbitration.  In the meantime I am requesting arbitration.  I am also requesting pick up of all furniture.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
I payed on 4-16-2017 a dwn payment of $750.00 which included taxes on my purchases. I agree 3 mths 90 day Early payout amount of $1,459 (lease #[redacted]),an $246.33 to be taken out my account for 3mths.Remaining balance will be $720.01. Acima Credit withdraw for 3mths $263.57 out of my acount.I still tried to pay out the balance I owed $668.29 before my 90 day pay out Acima wouldn't accept my payment because I didnt want to pay extra taxes added each time they withdraw from my account and also extra taxes they added on my remaining balance.My Bank was able to dispute 2 mths of the payments that Acima wthdraw from my account,due to BREACH OF CONTRACT! This is a Legal cause of Action and a type of civil Wrong in which a binding agreement for Exchange in NOT HONORED. Sincerely,
[redacted]

On August 29, 2016, Simple RTO, LLC (d/b/a: Simple Finance, hereinafter “Simple” or “us” or “we”) received the complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] through the Revdex.com. On August 3, 2016, Mr. [redacted] entered Katy Furniture (the “Merchant”), an independent third-party located in Katy,...

Texas, and conducted a transaction that required the leasing services of Simple. Mr. [redacted] signed a “Lease-Purchase Agreement” (the “Agreement”), which allowed him to possess tangible personal property owned by Simple, by paying periodic lease renewal payments. The nature of the lease is explained within the Agreement and will be described in further detail below. Simple is a virtual rent-to-own organization that provides alternative leasing options to those who do not qualify for traditional financing options. We purchase household goods and independent third-party merchants and then offer a 12-month lease of our purchased property to consumers who are approved for our services. If a customer pays all of the lease renewal payments, or exercises an Early Purchase Option (“EPO”) (described below), they may acquire ownership of the property. Mr. [redacted] applied for this leasing services from Simple on August 3, 2016 and was approved on August 4, 2016. Simple purchased a Lawson Godiva Sectional (the “Property”) from the Merchant and leased the Property to Mr. [redacted] through a 12-month Agreement wherein Mr. [redacted] agreed to pay $4072.12 for ownership of the Property through monthly payments of $339.34 over the course of 12 months. The Agreement identifies the total of payments and EPOs. “The total of your payments will be $4072.12 (“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 $1049 (“90-Day Option”).;” and the second EPO, “After ninety (90) days of this Agreement, you may purchase the Property by paying seventy-five (75%) percent of the total remaining periodic lease payments, plus any other charges.” Mr. [redacted] stated in his complaint, “I was told that to verify my bank information that they needed my routing and account number.” It is Simple’s policy to call customers who have submitted an application for our leasing services to verify all the information provided to us in an effort to protect the identity and financial privacy of each consumer as well as to confirm the payment frequency of the lease renewal payments. Simple spoke with Mr. [redacted] on August 3, 2016 to verify his personally identifiable information, employment information, and financial information that he provided on the application. Mr. [redacted] confirmed during that telephone conversation, that he was paid monthly and not bi-weekly as reported on the application and stated in the Agreement. Therefore, the lease renewal payment frequency was changed from bi-weekly payments of $156.62, to monthly payments of $339.34. Pursuant to the Agreement, the lease renewal payments commence, “… no sooner than 7 days from the delivery date. Mr. [redacted]’s first payment was due on August 16, 2016. Mr. [redacted] said, “Two weeks later I got a call from Simple Finance telling me my ‘lease’ payment was overdue…” The next occasion that Simple contacted Mr. [redacted] was on August 22, 2016. The lease renewal payment of $339.34 due on the 16th had been processed and was later returned unpaid due to Mr. [redacted] requesting a “Stop Payment” through his financial institution, incurring a $25 returned check fee with Simple. Simple contacted Mr. [redacted] to notify him the payment was returned unpaid, and he had incurred a $25 returned check fee. Simple attempted to create a “Catch-Up Plan” with Mr. [redacted] to bring his account current as to avoid further late fees. Mr. [redacted] claimed, “I purchased a sofa, I didn’t lease one.” Mr. [redacted] electronically signed the “Lease-Purchase Agreement” which allowed him to be in possession of the property that Simple purchased from the Merchant. According to the Agreement it states in twelve (12) point, bold-faced type, “WE OWN THE PROPERTY. This Agreement is a lease; a lease is a legal arrangement whereby the lessee/renter (you) agrees to pay the lessor/owner of the property (us) for use of the property for a specified period of time. You make lease renewal payments for the use of the Property for each lease renewal period only. You do not obtain any ownership rights unless you pay the Total of Payments, above, or exercise an early purchase option. You do not have the right to keep the Property if you do not make timely lease renewal payments. If you do not want to lease the Property but would rather purchase the Property now, you should consider cash or credit terms that may be available to you.” The Agreement clearly and explicitly states, in language easily understood, the nature of the Lease Agreement, the provisions of ownership, and the payments owed. Simple has complied with every required statutory provision provided in the Texas Rental-Purchase Agreement (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. § 92.052) and has not been deceptive in any practice or manner. The complaint also states, “my ‘lease’ payment was $334 every two weeks that’s $668 a month or $4400 for the same sofa that was $1699. Or 125% on a ‘lease’ I didn’t sign or have knowledge of. I plan to pay off the sofa as agreed in 90 days.” As previously explained, the Mr. [redacted]’s lease renewal payments are $334.12 every month. To date, he has been in the possession of the property for over 30 days and has not made a lease renewal payment towards his lease. The 90-Day Option will expire on November 2, 2016. If Mr. [redacted] has not paid $2066.74 by November 2, 2016, he will continue making his periodic renewal payments of $334.12 every month, for 12-months, for a total of $4072.12. If Mr. [redacted] wishes to keep our Property, he is obligated to make his lease renewal payments, and call Simple to make additional advanced payments on or before November 2, 2016. Mr. [redacted] claimed, “but now they have this ‘DocuSign’ contract that I didn’t sign AT ALL and are telling me that I am ‘past due’ on something that I had no knowledge of or signed.” Upon approving Mr. [redacted]’s application, Simple initiated an SMS text message to Mr. [redacted] containing a four-digit personal identification number (the “PIN”) to be used as Mr. [redacted]’s electronic authorization of the Agreement. The SMS text message said, “Notice! Using this code is equal to physically signing Simple’s lease-to-own contract.” When the PIN was returned to Simple, a pre-designed signature identifying the name of Mr. [redacted] was populated on the Agreement to indicate that the Agreement had been authorized electronically¹. If Mr. [redacted] wishes to Purchase the property for $2066.74, he will be required to exercise his 90-Day Option on or before November 2, 2016. As of the date of this response, Mr. [redacted] has an delinquent balance of $356.31 (including late fees) which will need to be resolved immediately. Simple is willing to work with Mr. [redacted] to arrange a repayment plan that will be less burdensome than making a double payment of $695.65 when his next payment is due on September 16, 2016. If Mr. [redacted] is unable to make his lease renewal payments, he may terminate his lease at any time by returning the Property and paying the minimum lease amount of $677.40, plus other charges due. Simple will cease all the telephone and email communication efforts to contact Mr. [redacted] as he desires. However, it will be the responsibility of Mr. [redacted] to call Simple to resolve his past due status, and to make additional payments to exercise the 90-Day Option by November 2, 2016.

On January 22, 2018, Acima Credit, LLC (hereinafter “Acima,” “we,” “us,” “our”) received a complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com. We have investigated the allegations and have prepared a response to explain the nature of the Lease-Purchase Agreement (the...

“Agreement”) and the contractual obligations of Ms. [redacted].  Acima is a virtual rent-to-own company offering alternative financing for those who may not qualify for traditional financing.  Acima offers only one lease model, which is a 12-month lease. Under the Acima lease program, a customer selects property from an independent third-party merchant, and Acima purchases that property from the merchant. The customer takes the property and leases it from Acima until all of the scheduled payments have been made. After all the payments have been made, the Agreement has been satisfied and the customer owns the property.  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 satisfies the Agreement earlier than the 12-month contractual term contained within the Agreement.  On January 31, 2017, Ms. [redacted] entered the Agreement to rent a king sized bed set (the “Property”) from Acima.  Ms. [redacted] was scheduled for bi-weekly payments of $86.99 for a term of 12 months.  Ms. [redacted] alleges that Acima reported her payments as late incorrectly on her credit report.  This is not true.  Ms. [redacted], upon the beginning of her repayment schedule, made two consecutive, on-time payments on February 17 and March 3, 2017.  On March 17, Ms. [redacted]’s regular renewal payment failed due to insufficient funds in her checking account. Acima allows a 3-day grace period after a failed payment for the customer to call in and correct the failed payment before the payment is marked late and a late fee is assessed on the account.  Ms. [redacted] did not call Acima to correct this payment and her regular lease renewal payments continued according to the payment schedule.  Because the March 17 payment was not paid on time or made up after it’s failure, Ms. [redacted]’s payments following the failed March 17 payment were applied to her past due balance.   Ms. [redacted] missed more payments following the initial failed payment.  An Acima agent sent Ms. [redacted] her payment history via email on September 1, 2017.  Acima arranged multiple catch-up plans in order to help Ms. [redacted] get her account back on track. Acima agreed to reduce the amount of fees outstanding on her account by $75.00, and Ms. [redacted] paid off her account on January 22, 2018. Acima has worked with Ms. [redacted] in good faith and has charged fees in accordance with the terms of the Agreement.  Any errors in fees charged have been corrected with Ms. [redacted].  Acima has not reported incorrect information on Ms. [redacted]’s credit report and her late payment posting is valid.  If Ms. [redacted] has further questions or concerns, we encourage her to call our Customer Service Department at (801) 297-1982.

Acima Credit, LLC (“Acima”) received the complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] through the Revdex.com on March 3, 2018. Ms. [redacted]’s complaint states that Acima would not respond to her complaint regarding paying off her lease.   Acima is a virtual rent-to-own (RTO) organization...

offering alternative financing for those who may not qualify for traditional financing.  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 lease.   The first option is a 90-Day EPO.  This option allows our customers to purchase the property at the invoice price, plus a $40.00 initial lease payment and a $10.00 account closure fee, within the first 90 days of the Agreement.  The second EPO stipulates that a customer may terminate the Agreement at any time after the first 90 days of the Agreement by paying a lump sum equivalent to 75% of the remaining lease renewal payments.  To exercise either EPO, a customer must call Acima’s Customer Service Department and initiate the payoff process.  Acima will not initiate the EPO payoff without appropriate consent from the customer because such action would necessarily require Acima to violate the terms of the Agreement by withdrawing more than the regularly scheduled payment from the customer’s preferred payment method.   On November 25, 2017, Ms. [redacted] entered into a lease-purchase Agreement with Acima wherein she agreed to rent a refrigerator for 12 months through twice-monthly payments of $42.88 for a total of $1068.96 (the “Total of Payments”) to acquire ownership of the property. If Ms. [redacted] were to exercise her 90-Day Option, she would be required to pay a total of $534.00 by no later than February 25, 2018 (90-Days after the commencement of the Agreement). Ms. [redacted] called Acima on March 1, 2018 requesting to exercise her 90-Day Option. Ms. [redacted] was informed by our representative that the 90-Day Option had expired, and she would be required to either exercise the second Option or pay the Total of Payments to obtain ownership of the property and terminate her lease.   Ms. [redacted] informed Acima that her property was delivered on November 27th, but later was returned and replaced with new property. After Acima verified the return and replacement of the property with the merchant, we adjusted the expiration date of her 90-Day Option. The deadline was adjusted to March 5, 2018.   On March 5, 2018, Ms. [redacted] called Acima to initiate a final payment under the 90-Day Option to terminate her account as paid in full. Pending that her payment is not returned to us unpaid, and is not charged back, Ms. [redacted] will obtain ownership of the property.   At this time and according to our understanding, Ms. [redacted] feels her complaint has been resolved.

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