Should Citifinancial Auto, or any company in its family, offer you financing, say no. These people have no ethics whatsoever.
Lost income has put me behind on payments, as it has for plenty of others recently. The 18th is when my installment falls due. Seeing that March's would come late, I rang Citifinancial Auto hoping to work out a plan, and their reaction left me speechless: help was clearly not on the table. I was told to pay immediately or a 'make a business decision' step would follow that same day. When I asked what that meant, Lisa replied with a sneer, 'what do you think it means?' I knew. It was a pressure tactic. The stock of this company traded at $2.76 as I wrote this, which makes you think they would bend over backwards for borrowers who have missed less than a month. I had actually pitied Citigroup and tried to act in a way I thought would help it.
Lisa was rude and kept cutting in while I was answering her. If my voice rose to get through, she asked me to be quieter and kept interrupting anyway. She fell silent whenever I spoke and resumed whenever I paused. It seems staff are trained to provoke customers deliberately until they lose their temper, and it does work. Lisa said she would end the call but did not.
On March 31 DeMill Bradford left a voice mail asking me to phone urgently. I did, yet never got through to him. Tony Kong took the call, then handed me to James, then to Michelle, and the whole chain aimed to frighten me since I had no money for a payment that day. All of them presented themselves as Account Managers. Every one was impolite, interrupted me and tried to put me down, which only left me frustrated. At 50, I have been through a lot and recognized the game. They each claimed no call from me came in on March 18, and I knew that was untrue.
I ended the call with Michelle by saying I needed to consult my husband, though I decided my attorney should hear about it first, and I carried my loan documents to his office. Citifinancial Auto was no stranger to him, and he said its reputation was awful. He wanted to know how much I cared about keeping the truck, and I asked why. His answer was that paying off a used vehicle across six years takes ages. Six years? What I signed at the dealership covered 42 months, or three and a half years. At that point he read through the loan documents with me.
They had come in the mail roughly five days after the purchase, and I frankly saw no reason to examine them. That was a mistake. Back at the dealership I had reviewed every term with the finance manager in his office, and what we agreed on was 42 months at 9% to finance $14,850.
The mailed contract instead said 72 months at 18% for $17,850. It also included $2500 for an extended warranty and $492 for life insurance, neither of which I had accepted. I suspect the dealership pushes warranties and life insurance on buyers and sends the loans to Citi even where buyers would be approved for decent bank loans. My own bank will not lend on used vehicles aged three years or older, and the dealership promised me an excellent loan. That did not turn out to be quite true.
My husband, our attorney and I discussed it and concluded that Citi appears to have an ethics problem, so I will give up the vehicle. Six years of payments on a truck that was three years old at purchase is something I will not accept. I assumed one year of payments was all that remained, and now 3 1/2 years are left, so the truck would be nine years old before it is mine. That differs from the 42 month loan I signed for. Another 3 1/2 years with Citi is ridiculous to contemplate. I know my credit will take the damage, but I will take no further loan and intend to buy my next car with cash. For now, a few used cars are available for me to drive. Perhaps they are less reliable, yet I will not endure Citi and its manner a day longer.
That same March 31, I phoned Citi to say they should collect the truck, and this time DeMill Bradford finally came on the line. What a surprise. His tone had flipped entirely, and he offered help: pay on the 8th, and he would postpone three months to give me some room. It was odd. We were on the phone more than an hour, and his friendliness and helpfulness made me suspicious.
On April 2, which is today, Citi rang me again, with Tony Kong this time, saying I had to call right back. I asked myself what they wanted now. I drove to my attorney so he could hear the exchange, and found a police officer in his office whom the attorney requested to remain as a witness. The officer agreed, and I placed the call.
Nobody put me through to Tony, though I asked for him and for DeMill. The agent who answered said their system had no record of any arrangement with DeMill from March 31. I was furious by then. As before, this person was rude and interrupted. I hung up, and my attorney advised me to dial again. Altogether I made 5 calls.
Four different people in a row swore the system listed no arrangements, and in effect accused me of lying. They shared one rude, bullying and absurd manner.
On the fifth call I said I wanted the truck picked up, and Lisa answered, once more rude and patronizing. She asked why I would not stand by my arrangements, so I told her how the four previous reps had denied any existed. Suddenly she located the March 31 arrangements I had made with DeMill. Really? Their games are bizarre, and I cannot see what they accomplish, apart from making the company look unprofessional and chaotic.
I informed her that she was on speaker, and that my daughter, my attorney and a police officer were all listening while I asked her to send someone for the truck. She turned silent and her attitude changed a little. Lisa asked if I understood what surrendering the vehicle means legally, and I answered that I did.
0 comments