The Massachusetts Attorney General has sued JD Byrider for allegedly using predatory practices in its sale of defective vehicles with high cost loans at four locations in the state.
The attorney general alleges that JD Byrider took advantage of consumers by routinely trapping them in an unsustainable and unfavorable sales package, known as the “JD Byrider Program.” This program generally involves selling drivers a poor quality car with a high cost loan, along with an expensive extended service contract, marketed through an aggressive and misleading advertising and sales campaign.
According to the complaint, consumers were unaware that JD Byrider priced its cars at more than double their retail value, and required drivers to sign on to car financing with an annual percentage rate of 20 percent, regardless of their credit qualifications.
The suit claims JD Byrider bundles its extended service contract into the financing as well.
The attorney general alleges that the cars sold by JD Byrider are defective and sometimes inoperable. The complaint further alleges that JD Byrider employs a faulty underwriting process that underestimates the consumer’s expenses and costs in order to qualify them for financing they can’t afford.
As a result of these practices, the complaint alleges, more than half of JD Byrider’s deals fail or end in repossession, causing substantial and long-term economic harm to consumers not just due to the inflated costs, but due to losing transportation and suffering long term damage to their credit as well.
The Florida Department of Revenue issued an emergency order to extend certain filing due dates for Florida businesses registered with the department in each of the 67 counties affected by Hurricane Irma.
Order of Emergency Waiver Number 17-235-DOR-003 changes the filing due date for sales and use tax, as well as fuel tax returns and payments to Sept. 29.
Sales and use tax, as well as fuel tax returns and payments are normally due on the 1st day of the month, and late after the 20th day of the month.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issues its first-ever no-action to Upstart, a company that uses non-traditional or alternative data and modeling techniques in lending decision-making.
Under the terms of the no-action letter, Upstart has agreed to a number of conditions designed to mitigate risk to consumers. The no-action letter signifies that bureau staff have no present intent to recommend initiation of supervisory or enforcement action against Upstart with respect to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
The letter applies to Upstart’s model for underwriting and pricing applicants as described in the company’s application materials . This no-action letter is specific to the facts and circumstances of Upstart and does not serve as an endorsement of the use of any particular variables or modeling techniques in credit underwriting.
As a condition of the no-action letter, Upstart will regularly report lending and compliance information to the CFPB to mitigate risk to consumers and aid the bureau’s understanding of the real-world impact of alternative data and modeling techniques on lending decision-making.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau recently released information on its supervisory actions in the first half of the year, including those involving auto finance.
Many auto credit servicers give borrowers options to avoid repossession of their vehicle if a loan is delinquent or in default. But the CFPB’s examiners found that one or more companies were repossessing vehicles after the repossession was supposed to be cancelled.
Some creditors wrongfully listed the account as delinquent. In other instances, customer service representatives did not cancel the repossession order when feasible after borrowers made sufficient payments.
Also, some repossession agents did not check the documentation beforehand to see if the repossession had been cancelled.