Leaders Financial Company

As [redacted] discussed in detail via telephone with our Vice President of Operations (Paul T[redacted]), on June 30, 2015, [redacted] (and/or the primary maker—[redacted] is a co-signer/endorser) made a partial payment of $132.59, out of the required monthly payment of $265.41, in December 2014,...

and has missed two payments of $264.41 due May 29, 2015 and June 29, 2015.  Along with $30.00 in late payment fees, the total amount currently due and owing, therefore, is $692.41.  We apologize for any prior miscommunication or confusion that we may have caused, the Retail Sales Installment Contract requires timely payments, in full, provides for late fees and explains that late payments will increase the amount of interest payable accruing on unpaid principal.  Because [redacted] (and/or the primary maker) made multiple (and timely) payments in excess of the stated monthly payment obligation, no additional interest has accrued above that stated and included in the original payment schedule.  If the account is made current for the next payment due (now $928.82 as of July 29, 2015, unless other payments are submitted prior to that date), we will waive the late charges.  Thank you.Todd V[redacted]Compliance Director

Leaders Financial Company (“Leaders”) agrees that it applied both (1) late charges and (2) the cost of a collateral insurance policy to [redacted] account.  [redacted], in the Retail Installment Sales Contract (the “RISC”, which governs the terms of the vehicle financing) between [redacted]...

[redacted] and Leaders, acknowledged and agreed to the potential imposition Late Charges set forth on the first page of the RISC (in the box entitled “Federal Truth-In-Lending Disclosures”), which explicitly states the application of a $10 late charge for any occasion upon which payment is not received within 10 days following the scheduled due date of such monthly payment.   [redacted] submitted certain payments more than 10 days late, resulting in a total of $130.00 in late charges, through the date of this response.    Leaders’ right to apply costs for a collateral insurance policy is set forth in Section 2(d) of the second page of the RISC.  Leaders collateral insurance provider first informed Leaders of a lapse in required insurance coverage on [redacted] vehicle on May 8, 2016 and in August 2016, following the statutorily required notice, applied a collateral insurance policy in the amount of $901.64, payable in installments over a twelve month period, retroactive to May of 2016.    Following the application of the collateral insurance policy and consequential increase in monthly payments, [redacted] submitted proof of insurance to Leaders for the periods comprising May 21, 2016 through June 25, 2016, and again from June 30, 2016 through August 25, 2016.  Leaders, after reviewing these submitted periods for which [redacted] did, indeed have insurance and gathering additional information directly from [redacted] insurer, refunded her account for the full amount of the collateral insurance policy, in the sum total of $901.64.    Leaders again, in January 2017, received notice of a lapse in [redacted] insurance and applied a collateral insurance policy in April 2017 (retroactive to January 2017), in the amount of $775.19. While Leaders’ research into the account indicated that [redacted] held a “liability only” policy from February 2, 2017 through June 6, 2017, Section 2(d) of the RISC requires “physical damage insurance” (in order to protect Leader’s lien on the collateral), and therefore Leaders was required to implement a collateral insurance policy.  Leaders was also aware of a proposed Esurance policy [redacted]), but this policy never went into effect due to non-payment of the premium.   Prior to applying the collateral insurance policy, Leaders, again, requested of [redacted] to submit proof of insurance in order to receive a full or partial refund (if a refund is warranted due to current insurance), and; Leaders has made several subsequent requests for proof of insurance, including most recently upon receipt of this Revdex.com-submitted complaint, but has not received any response. Leaders herby attaches to this response both copies of its notices and proof of delivery.   Leaders, going forward, will review any proof of insurance submitted during the remaining term of the RISC and apply any and all appropriate refunds.  However, until Leaders can verify insurance, it must maintain this collateral insurance policy on [redacted] vehicle, in order to protect its lien on the collateral.   Regarding the late charges:  while-- as stated above—Leaders applies late charges as explicitly set forth in the RISC (contract), and did so in this case.  However, Leaders has determined that, because there may be confusion regarding the application of additional charges and with the earnest desire to assist [redacted] in bringing the RISC out of default, Leaders will waive all prior late charges, through the date of this response, in the total amount of $130.00.   Leaders thanks [redacted] and the Revdex.com for providing this opportunity to respond to [redacted] inquiry and response.

Under the terms of the standard Retail Installment Sales Contract, and as a matter of our business policy, purchasing-borrowers do remain obligated to make monthly payments even when...

vehicles are in a state of disrepair.  Leaders Financial Company (“Leaders”) understand that the purchase of a vehicle is a significant financial outlay and we regret when our customers are dissatisfied with their purchase, but Leader’s can only assist dissatisfied purchasers to the extent the licensed dealership is willing to participate.  Ultimately, Leaders loses money on accounts for which dissatisfied customers cease making payments  as obligated.  Leaders  accepted the voluntary surrender of [redacted] vehicle, and sold the vehicle at private auction.  The sale resulted in a deficiency balance of $674.49, which balance was properly reported to the Credit Reporting Agencies to who we furnish information [redacted].
Leaders has no record of receiving any settlement offer or payment plan, but always welcomes our customers cooperation and participation in reaching a settlement. 
Leaders acknowledges that [redacted] did, indeed, commence paying on the aforementioned settlement.  We are pleased to accept the offer as stated in [redacted] complaint to the Revdex.com, as well as consider any additional offer if [redacted] would prefer a different arrangement.
Regarding the question/complaint regarding credit reporting, Leaders never hesitates to analyze and work with Customers who either contact Leaders directly via telephone or written letter, or indirectly contact Leaders through the Credit Reporting Agencies, to analyze and, where appropriate, edit our reporting. 
In this incidence, we have changed our current reporting to indicate a voluntary surrender of the vehicle with [redacted] currently paying on the settled agreement.  Leaders cannot, however, change or revise the credit score.  The Credit Reporting Agencies calculate and dictate credit scores without our input (Leaders simply reports payment history)—therefore, we cannot predict how our change in reporting will affect [redacted] credit score.
However, upon completion of the aforementioned payment plan, Leaders will gladly revisit our reporting and assist [redacted] in further revising our reporting, as appropriate.  Leaders will also revisit our reporting prior to completion of payment, at [redacted] request.  [redacted]  may also contact Leaders Compliance Department at any time, for further assistance via telephone at ([redacted] or via email: [redacted] 
Thank you for alerting us to this complaint.
[redacted], Compliance

[redacted] did, indeed, pay his account in full as stated, on August 16, 2016.  On September 12, 2016, Leaders Financial Company...

(“Leaders”) mailed his Certificate of Title, stamped as paid with Leaders’ lien marked as released, to the address that [redacted] provided for his account (which is the same address as [redacted] states in his complaint).   Unfortunately, it appears that the Certificate of Title was lost in the mail, or did not otherwise arrive to [redacted] possession at the stated address.[redacted] called Leaders on September 27, 2016, to inform that he had not received the Certificate of Title.  Concluding that the Certificate of Title was lost, Leaders, on September 27, 2016, sent a lien release letter that [redacted] may present at, or mail to, the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission and obtain a duplicate Certificate of Title.  During the phone call between [redacted] and Leaders on September 27, 2016, Leaders explained these circumstances to [redacted] and promised that Leaders would reimburse [redacted] for the costs of obtaining the new, duplicate Certificate of Title.  Leaders certainly intends to honor this promise.
Leaders understands [redacted] frustration with not having received his Certificate of Title as he and Leaders both expected, and apologizes for the inconvenience of having to obtain a duplicate Certificate of Title. Leaders appreciates [redacted] patronage and regrets that the Certificate of Title did not arrive in the mail.

Leaders Financial Company (“Leaders”) reviewed the file, again, in light of Ms. [redacted]’s rejection, and -- because Ms. [redacted] does not provide any new or additional information relative to the initial complaint-- does not change its position. Leaders previously submitted all documents that it deems relevant to the complaint.  If Ms. [redacted] or the Revdex.com would like to review any additional documents, please feel free to request them and Leaders will provide all available information. Thank you for providing the opportunity to review and respond to this complaint.  Leaders will remain available to settle the account now or in the near future if Ms. [redacted] desires.

Leaders Financial Company (“Leaders”) attaches hereto a copy of the repossession record and invoice, confirming that Leaders, through its agent, [redacted], repossessed Ms. [redacted]’s vehicle on January 12, 2017, for which Leaders received the repossession invoice on January...

13, 2017.  At that time, Leader’s required the stated $1,132.50 to release the vehicle to Ms. [redacted]’s possession.  Ms. [redacted] had not, at that time made a monthly payment since November 3, 2016.  Leaders additionally has not received a payment since the date of repossession, through the date of this response.On or about February 1, 2017, Leaders transported the vehicle to the auction site, in preparation for sale.  Along with the additional transportation costs, the total for redemption is now $1,600.00 Leaders will accept the stated $1,600.00 (including accrued payments owing and repossession and transportation costs) in exchange for Ms. [redacted]’s redemption, and return, of the vehicle.  That sum does not include Ms. [redacted]’s next monthly payment, scheduled for February 8, 2017.Thank you.

Review: This company continues to tell me and the owner of the vehicle that he is short over $600 dollars every month but we have been paying every month since got the vehicle. And have bank statements saying so. I have talked to a few different people in this company and they each tell me something different. First it was that January was paid then they said it wasn't. Then they say June was paid and another person says it wasnt.. This company has no communication between employees and their billing department has no idea what they are doing. The vehicle has been up for repo multiple times even tho we are up to date with payments.Desired Settlement: Them to figure out their billing department issues. And for employees to communicate with eachother..

Business

Response:

As [redacted] discussed in detail via telephone with our Vice President of Operations (Paul T[redacted]), on June 30, 2015, [redacted] (and/or the primary maker—[redacted] is a co-signer/endorser) made a partial payment of $132.59, out of the required monthly payment of $265.41, in December 2014, and has missed two payments of $264.41 due May 29, 2015 and June 29, 2015. Along with $30.00 in late payment fees, the total amount currently due and owing, therefore, is $692.41. We apologize for any prior miscommunication or confusion that we may have caused, the Retail Sales Installment Contract requires timely payments, in full, provides for late fees and explains that late payments will increase the amount of interest payable accruing on unpaid principal. Because [redacted] (and/or the primary maker) made multiple (and timely) payments in excess of the stated monthly payment obligation, no additional interest has accrued above that stated and included in the original payment schedule. If the account is made current for the next payment due (now $928.82 as of July 29, 2015, unless other payments are submitted prior to that date), we will waive the late charges. Thank you.Todd V[redacted]Compliance Director

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I have bank statements stating that I am only one month behind which is april. We have 2 payments made in December 2014. One for $130 and one for $275.41. There was 2 payments made in the month of June. June 1, $275.41 and June 15, $275.41

Regards,

Review: Leaders financial had a payment arragment with me on my car loan which I was behind on. We talked numberous times and agreed to defer a payment for a cost of $118 and pay a payment of $305 which is my monthly payment. On May 1st at 11pm a huge repossession agent comes to my home saying he was taking the car. He wouldn't show me paperwork and said he wanted my keys. I said no with my fianc standing in front on me he lunged at us saying I'll get the vehicle and those keys one way or another well we shut the door and called the police. I'm 5'8" 180 pounds this agent was about 6'4" 500 pounds trying to fight me I wasn't about to start that. Anyways the police show up and said that we could press charges but since the bank leaders financial and the repo agent [redacted] didn't notify the police ahead of time and didn't have the proper paperwork they weren't letting them take the car. They never towed it or hooked up a tow truck to my car. They blocked my car in with a van and simply wanted me to hand over the keys. The next morning the bank said the payment arragment wasn't any good anymore and wanted $1,083.00 to bring my account up to date. That day May 2nd they were paid $1,100 and brought my acct up to date. Now they want $400 for a repo fee when they never repo' the car. I spoke to 3 different attorneys they said it's a violation of the fair debt collection act. Plus a repo man is suppose to be professional and not break the peace which he did. I don't think I should have to pay $400 for someone coming to my home and trying to take me car after myself and the police dept both said he didn't have the correct paperwork. The bank refuses to bend only saying $400 is a deal it could be more. I really need help or told what to do. They said they can come repo my car again for the $400 even tho my acct is paid up to date and then some. Please let me know what I can do. Thank you so much.Desired Settlement: I want the bank to drop the $400 fee they request. They never hooked up to my car or took it and the repo guy was not professional and didn't keep the peace like he's supposed to do. Lunging at at girl when your 3 times the size of someone screaming isn't professional. I paid my account up to date and I don't owe them anything else. Thanks

Business

Response:

Leaders Financial Company understands that making payments as contractually promised can become difficult despite expectations when entering into a loan agreement. We strive to make loans to individuals whom we deem credit worthy, but as is the nature of the business, some customers for a variety of reasons find themselves unable or unwilling to meet their payment obligations. [redacted] was late in making his first payment and throughout the term of the loan became progressively later in each payment cycle and eventually missed several payments, altogether. [redacted] made numerous verbal promises to both (1) make payments and (2) remain in contact with Leaders Financial Company, but grew increasingly elusive and unable or unwilling to communicate with Leaders regarding his delinquencies. Indeed, [redacted] was behind on payments and did not become current until Leaders initiated the repossession.Regarding the $400.00 charge for the repossession activity, Leaders may, based on its loan contract with [redacted], charge [redacted] for repossession costs that Leaders incurs. We do not intend to absorb the cost of our attempted repossession and expect [redacted] to pay the fees as charged. Incidentally, the sole reason that Leaders was unable to complete the repossession was [redacted]’s summoning of the police department, who asked our repossession agent to temporarily cease the repossession action at the time of the incident. Our repossession agent willingly waited and spoke with the police, who did not find any violation regarding the repossession. We have requested from [redacted] a copy of the police report in order to help us verify the facts (or at least the disputed statements), but have not received a cop7y from [redacted] at this point in time. The $400.00 fee reflects the (1) request for service and response thereto, regardless of whether the repossession is successful, plus (2) the three hours of time [redacted] expended in attempting to obtain possession of the vehicle and waiting for and speaking with the [redacted] police department, including the initial officers who responded to [redacted]’s call and then subsequently to [redacted]’s demand for a “Sergeant” to appear on the case, requiring [redacted] to remain for and additional period. To reiterate, Leaders initiated the repossession due to [redacted]’s multiple defaults on the contract, and Leaders does not intend to absorb the repossession costs.Regarding the repossession agent, we have a long standing relationship with [redacted]. This is the first complaint that we have received related to [redacted]. Certainly, we will monitor [redacted]’s work more closely going forward to enable us to determine whether any negative pattern exists or arises. We monitor and track all of our service providers as a matter of course, but when complaints arise we always take them as an opportunity to provide greater scrutiny and hopefully better customer service. Regarding this incident, we contacted and extensively questioned [redacted] regarding the incident, and received testimony that was the complete opposite of [redacted]’s testimony on every material fact. As stated, based upon our positive history with [redacted], and lacking any prior complaints or incidences of any misconduct, we are unable to draw conclusions against [redacted] from this incident. Leaders Financial Company asserts that it did not violate any provision of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: The repo agent one broke the peace of the attempted repo that by law makes it a wrongful repossession. Secondly the police responded and told the agent he didn't have the correct or legal paperwork to reposess the car or follow [redacted] protocol. If the repo agent had correct paperwork the police department would have done there job by enforcing the car be given to them. The agent was told he did not have the correct paperwork that night and that if he did obtain the paperwork they would come back with him and enforce it. Whether you believe my story or the agents story why would the police not enforce the law?? They didn't because they didn't have the correct paper work and the police told him that and the agent acknowledged he didn't. Also he never repossessed the car or even hooked up to it. My contract doesn't say looking for a car to repossess constituens a valid repo again making it a wrongfully repo. The law reads if the client is wrongfully charged and the client wins and I was told by 3 different lawyers I would have no problem proving I was correct they need to pay 3 times the amount which would be 1200 plus attorney fees I addition the agent did damage to my rim that was just reconditioned a fewonthd prior. I refuse to pay for something that was done illegally, incorrect, and unprofessionally. My fiancé is in school to be a Dr and is already a mental health counselor and was a witness to this agent acting loud and lunging and her. My neighbor also heard and saw him screaming at me. The law clearly states a repo agent may not breach the peace and he did. Also they didn't bring and tow truck they never hooked up a tow truck or attempted to. So how could I be responsible for paying $400 for something they one didn't do and secondly acted totally out if his boundaries. If the $400 isn't dropped I will take this to court with my witnesses, and point out the 2 laws they broke and sue for the wrongful repo. The police dept is ordered to do there job and as noted not only officers responded but a supervisor did and showed the agent the paperwork was wrong. If it was correct they would have enforced it. I'll even suppnea the officers. I'm not gonna get bullied to pay like the repo agent bullied me the night he came. If I need to go to court in ready. In my opinion it would be cheaper for the company to drop the $400 fee or my neighbors, my fiancé, and myself will testify that this agent was breaching the peace. Thank you b

Regards,

Consumer

Response:

I received your request for the police report I will get it to you today. In regard to the damage to my rim, they tried putting a Club or something around my tire and rim so the car couldn't be driven but it kept falling off time after time and Tammy from the [redacted] kept trying to get it on and moving it shaking etc and the boot or club whatever it's called was metal and my rim is aluminum and it was recondiotioned by a body shop last year and they scratched my rim up by doing so. The club ended up just falling off anyways but that was the only attempt at trying to hook up but they couldn't even do that right and I told them they were ruining my rim and Tammy said we could take them to court they don't care. It was part of there horrible personality and being so unprofessional. I'll get the police report though like I said. Thanks

Business

Response:

Leaders Financial Company appreciates the opportunity to review the [redacted] Police Department report in connection with the incident reported involving [redacted]. The report seems to indicate that [redacted], in fact, followed customary procedures, cooperated with the police, dedicated additional time and resources to await the arrival of additional police personnel that [redacted] requested after discussing the incident with the initial officer that [redacted] summoned to his residence and did, indeed, have the correct paper work for the repossession. [redacted] offered to obtain a judicial order for the repossession only after [redacted] refused to cooperate with the repossession. A judicial order is not required in New Jersey for a repossession on behalf of a secured party , but is used when a repossession agent or secured party is unable to obtain repossession, due to resistance or other actions of the defaulting party, and is required to seek the assistance of law enforcement. Leaders Financial Company rescinded the repossession order on the day following the incident in response to [redacted]’s full payment of the sums then owing, for which Leaders Financial Company remains greatly appreciative. Furthermore, in order foster its relationship in earnest with [redacted] in anticipation of maintaining the positive direction of [redacted]’s account, Leaders’ management has decided to absorb the costs of the attempted repossession, and will not apply this expense to [redacted]’s account,as requested. Thank you.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. Thank you so much for your help and dedication to keeping companies compliant. I also would like to thank Leaders for doing the right thing in this matter. Thanks again,

Regards,