• Report: #82967

Complaint Review: Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Toyota Motor Finance Corporation

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Friday, March 05, 2004
  • Last Posting: Monday, November 01, 2004
  • Reported By:Marshfield Vermont
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Toyota Motor Finance Corporation
Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, 2 Highwood Drive Ste2041 Tewksbury Massachusetts 01876 U.S.A.

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Toyota Motor Finance Corporation ripoff repossessed my pickup when it was nearly paid off violating three consumer laws:leaving me stranded on a mountain Tewksbury Massachusetts


2Author 1Consumer 1Employee/Owner

Respond to this Report

  • Respond to this report!
    What's this?
  • Also a victim?
    What's this?
  • Repair Your Reputation
    ...the right way!
    Corporate Advocacy Program
My Toyota pickup truck was repossessed in August of 2001 without notice to me that repossession was imminent. I was two payments behind: there was a payment in the mail to them. At two previous occasions on being two payments behind, I was contacted by phone and warned by office manager Marcos Mieles, that unless I sent them a payment by overnight mail, the truck would be repossess post haste. On both occasions I responded, each mailing costing me some thirteen dollars.

However, I received no such advanced warning in August. My truck was taken from the front of my barn as witnessed by me from my kitchen window. Very upset, I phoned the State Police as I thought it had been stolen. They informed me it had been repossessed. I became somewhat hysterical, as, at age 72, (having driven since I was seventeen), I'd never had a vehicle repossessed. I had no idea what to do.

I telephoned Mr.Mieles at the Tewksbury, MA office and asked why he had not notified me, as before, that repossession was imminent. He appeared to be nervous and claimed, “We tried to contact you.” I could not believe him, as my daily habits have not changed one iota since his previous two warnings. I am always at home except for occasional brief jaunts to the village grocery or to perform farm tasks with my truck here on my property. As he had no difficulty phoning me previously, he would have had no difficulty in August 2001. It seems quite obvious to me that no effort was made to contact me. Ironically, that same evening, a neighbor, knowing of the financial stress I was in, came over and handed me a check for $500. I told him it was “too late,” as the truck had been taken already.

I did not hear from Toyota again, until I was sent a bill claiming I still owed them $2,000. Having owned the truck for six years, and having traded in my former vehicle for $2,000, I had a total of $11,000 invested in the truck. I have no idea of what happened to it. I was never notified of a private or public sale. I researched some consumer law and found that a debtor has the right to buy back the vehicle (redeem the collateral).

I was denied that right, perhaps under the assumption by Toyota, that I was too “poor” to do so, or two “dumb” to try. As to “poor,” there are ways to obtain financial assistance when a “poor” person finds him/her self in a desperate situation. I was denied my right to redeem the vehicle and confess to being “dumb” about such a situation.

To this day I have absolutely no idea how, where, when and to whom my truck was sold. Nor have I any idea of the price it brought. My balance owed Toyota was $2,000. The truck had no rust, was a 4WD with only 73,000 miles on it, and a paint job like new. I believe heartily that it sold for more than $2,000. I should have been paid by Toyota, any monies garnered at sale over the amount I still owed on the truck. I have received nothing. By law, I should have received reasonable notice of an impending sale so that I would have had an opportunity to exercise my right to bid on my truck.

Also, since I had paid at least 60% of the purchase price, I was entitled to receive money gained by sale of my truck, over what I still owe. I also found while researching, that sale of a vehicle must be “commercially reasonable,” and that “in some cases the creditor would require court approval prior to the sale. I also found that the lender could by written notice demand full payment of the loan, which would be an alternative to repossession. No such alternative was offered me.

I “fell apart” when my truck was taken. Because of a low fixed income I had to at times be late with the truck payment in order to set money aside toward my property taxes. Each time I was late, I added the ten-dollar “late fee” to the payment. Mr. Mieles told me that so long as I did not go more than two payments behind, it was “all right.” Thus in Aug.01, when I was two payments behind and a third was due, I mailed them a payment so I'd still be just two payments behind. The payments were $254 per month. The late fee was ten dollars for a total of $264. Shortly after my truck was taken, I received notice that I still owed $1,995. I find it impossible to believe they sold the truck for only FIVE DOLLARS. I ignored the notice and have heard nothing since.

Mr.Mieles was aware I live on a mountain, three miles down to the village. That truck was my lifeline, as I lived alone. With it I hauled the wood I needed to heat my home, manure and mulch for the garden; stones and rocks for ongoing repair of my driveway. I needed it to go for groceries, to the doctor, and other essentials. Having it taken, cut me off from any social life or entertainment.

For three years I have been unable to sell my produce at Farmer's Market: this cost me much needed income. Losing the truck so suddenly left me emotionally, mentally, and physically stressed (hauling rocks, wood, and manure in a wheel barrel will stress younger muscles than mine.) I also suffered a loss of self-esteem and independence. As I write this, I am in pain from a fractured rib, having fallen on a downgrade while pulling my grandson's plastic sled filled with stove wood to heat my home. My right ankle is afflicted with a chronic sprain. My knees and hips have been causing me pain due to the stress of getting wood to the house without my truck.

In researching consumer law I found the Statute of Limitations for legal action as regards vehicle repossession is six years. Why did I not take immediate action against Toyota Motor Finance? As stated, I “fell apart.” As a widow with a farm to run completely on my own, I was unable to hire an attorney. Beset with a deep depression due to the sudden loss of a vehicle indispensable to my very well being, I faced battle against a large corporation employing a battery of lawyers: I simply “lost heart.” Of late I have recovered my wits, and the anger at what was done to me.

Falling down as I hauled wood with a child's sled instead of my truck has propelled me into taking action. It appears I have been taken advantage of and very possibly defrauded in a deliberate act of repossessing an excellent vehicle with a minimum owed on it. This of course would create a quick profit for Toyota Corporation, Toyota Motor Finance Corporation, and the new owner of the dealership from which I purchased the truck.

It appears advantage has been taken due to my age, low income, and ignorance of legal procedures involved in vehicle repossession. It is logical to assume that others have been, are, and will be in my situation, a widow with no one to turn to for advice, and no time to do so, as the truck was taken suddenly without any notification. For justice to prevail, such incidents should be dealt with by a company like Toyota, on a case-by-case basis rather than cold-bloodedly “by the book.” Nor should such a company treat a customer who has purchased a total of three Toyota's in the recent past.

Certainly Toyota Motor Finance set a precedent on two occasions in notifying me of imminent repossession thereby allowing me the opportunity to resolve the matter. I question why they suddenly change their method of procedure. I would have managed to get a payment to them by overnight mail as I did on the two other occasions. The payment I mailed would have reached them on time. I felt the truck was safe from repossession. That they took it as they did came as a shock. I would like to sue them for the legal procedures they failed to take, and the stress and hardship their actions caused me. I would seek compensatory and punitive damages, the latter to have them think twice before they so unjustly repossess another person's vehicle.

Ruth
Marshfield, Vermont

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 3/5/2004 8:53:45 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/car-financing/toyota-motor-credit/toyota-motor-credit-corporatio-2ewy3.htm.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Toyota Motor Credit

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
2Author 1Consumer 1Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Consumer Comment

Help for Ruth . . . You Are Not Alone

AUTHOR: David Cyrus - Northridge (U.S.A.)

Dear Ruth:

What you have described is the types of abusive activities engaged in by the Toyota Motor Credit Corporation (TMCC).

I am the Executive Director of Epicenter Credit Consultants in Northridge, CA. This office assists consumers against unfair and unlawful practices committed by creditors, debt collectors, credit bureaus, auto finance companies, and mortgage companies.

I have listed on the Bad Business Bureau a long list of regulatory agencies and authorities to which you can, if you choose, file your formal complaints against Toyota Motor Credit Corporation (TMCC).

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation (TMCC) is the domestic finance arm of Toyota Financial Services, a subsidiary of Toyota Motor Corporation of Japan.

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation is the same company as Lexus Financial Services. Both do business under the service mark of Toyota Financial Services (TFS).

TMCC is the 7th largest finance company in the domestic United States. It is the 3rd largest captive automotive finance company in the U.S.
TMCC manages over $32 billion dollars of assets including secured purchase and lease contracts, insurance services, and commercial and retail financial products.

Is there any question on how such a company achieves so much wealth? It is off the backs of abused consumers such as yourself.

I encourage you to search this site for the addresses I listed on where you can direct your written complaints. This applies to ALL CONSUMERS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPLOITED!!!

Contact your State Senator, Dianne Feinstein in California, the California Attorney General, Federal Trade Commission, and Better Business Bureau.

These regulatory agencies have to be aware of the rampant cases of abuse and illegal activities actively being promoted by this company.

You are right in that you did have the right to reinstate and/or redeem your Contract with Toyota. You should have received a written notice prior to sale. The sale should have been facilitated at a public auction. You should have had the right to extend the reinstatement period. There are federal laws that regulate auto repossessions, and each State also has its own variation of that law.

Contact your State Attorney General to definitely file a complaint of the illegal practices conducted by Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, and to also learn with specificity what the repossession laws are in your State.

Write to all the agencies that I have listed on this site.

Fight for justice, fairness, and integrity in the marketplace.

You experienced insensitivity because you were dealing with a collections representative that was trained to harrass, abuse, and pester you into making payments. The only objective of such workers is to get as much money out of your pocket ... TODAY!!! As fast as they can.

They, collections personnel, are not interested in your health, welfare, or personal situation. As I indicated, it is a form of institutionalized abuse, and it is perpetrated by corporations everyday all across the country.

Contact information:

RE: Toyota Motor Credit Corporation
Epicener Credit Consultants
C/O David Cyrus Koupai
P.O. Box 7153
Northridge, CA 91326

I wish all agrieved consumers much success in their pursuit of fairness and integrity in the marketplace. Feel free to send your reports, suggestions, and comments to my business mailing address above.

Thank you and all the best,
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Employee

An unfortunate situation for all involved

AUTHOR: Brantley - Miami (U.S.A.)

Let me begin by saying that this is an unfortunate situation for everyone involved. It's unfortunate for Ruth who has lost her automobile, and it's unfortunate for us at Toyota as we have lost a customer. It's also unfortunate for people like Mr. David Cyrus who previously posted - someone who obviously deals with things like this that happen on a daily basis.

I will also state that what I am posting in this report is not directly related to Ruth and her situation. I do not know who she is, I have never seen her file, nor do I plan to ever see it. I intend only to offer an explanation of what may have happened and to inform others of what might happen so that they may protect themselves before it does happen.

Whenever a customer buys a vehicle, no matter where it is financed, a contract is always signed. That contract always states that if the payments are not paid as agreed or if insurance is not maintained to protect the lienholder's interest - we have options. We may reposess after giving you notification, we may demand that the contract be paid in full or the collateral surrendered, or we may make arrangements with you to bring the account current and protect our interest as well as yours.

Before a reposession can occur, the law states that a customer MUST be informed that they are in default. This is called Notice of Right to Cure Default. Basically what Notice of Right to Cure Default states is "you are in default based on the terms of your contract." It gives you a specific amount of time to remedy this default, or then the creditor may take further action against you - usually reposession.

The Notice of Right to Cure Default law states that after we inform you THE FIRST TIME that you are in default, any such default after that does not have to be documented and that we may invoke our rights immediately.

Ruth stated in her report that she was continually two months late, and that it had become an issue that her third payment had either become due or was about to become due. She did not state whether or not she had ever been informed that she was in default, but she was no doubt informed. Our computer system is set up to automatically send out Notice of Right to Cure Default letters by certified mail on the 32nd day that the payment is late. This happens automatically the first time a payment is 32 days late. We do this not only to comply with the law, but also to make the customer aware of what might happen to them.

In taking into consideration that Ruth would have been informed at some point and time that she was in default, and if her account representative had allowed her to consistently be "two months" delinquent, she was pretty much on "borrowed time."

If an account is consistently late, not an occasional two or three weeks, but consistently month after month late - this is a continued default. Our usual policy is that if we are working with a customer and if the customer shows intention to pay, we will allow that customer to pay as long as they never cross 61 days late. On the 62nd day of a repeatedly late account our only option is to reposess that vehicle.

What Ruth and David are correct in saying is that notification has to be made after we reposess that vehicle and prior to public auction. When a vehicle is reposessed, the customer usually has 10 days to redeem their vehicle, pretty much meaning that the customer can pay all outstanding fees, the entire outstanding balance and can regain the ownership of their vehicle. At this point we do not allow payments to be made anymore, if you owe $30,000 on your car, you must pay the entire $30,000 to get your car back.

If we do not comply with reposession laws in each state that we operate in, then we are in clear violation of the law. Whether it is accidental or intentional is irrelevant. The law states that this is the process we must follow, and we do follow that process.

Earlier I mentioned that we hope to never approach this situation with a customer, and now I will give you an example: Let's assume that a customer has average credit, and a stable work history. If that customer chooses to buy an $18,000 car and finances it over five years, the average amount repaid will be somwhere around $21-$25,000 depending on the interest rate. For the first few years of this contract, pretty much all of the payments paid are being paid towards the interest and not the principle on the note. For example's sake, let's assume the customer has a $300 monthly payment. If this customer has their car for ten months and then falls behind in their payments and we have to reposess that car - we have taken in $3,000. This $3,000 has been applied towards the interest only, so if the customer owed $21,000 on the vehicle, we're just now getting to the point of saying the customer's payout would be $18,000. Keep in mind this customer paid $18,000 sticker for this car.

At this point it is a loss for everyone. Now we have an $18,000 USED car sitting in an impound lot that we have to auction if the customer does not redeem. Once this car goes to auction, it is sold for "auction value," usually to another dealer. Now that this car is a used vehicle and has depreciated, there is no way that we will recoup anywhere near $18,000. The most that we could probably hope to gain from the sell of this car is $9,000 - $10,000. Now we are left with a difference of $8,000 which we must demand that the customer pay. If that customer chooses not to pay, then we are left "holding the bag" on $8,000 since we paid the dealer when you purchased that vehicle.

The example I just gave you is illustrative no matter what point of the loan you are in. The amounts go down in all situations - unfortunately so do resale values.

Again, let me say that I am deeply apologetic to Ruth that she has had to experience this. But now I must say that once we get to this point with a customer, we don't look at this as personal anymore. It becomes business. Mr. Cyrus will now say that this comment means that we don't care about our customers, and I will address that shortly. Once we must reposess and eventually sell a vehicle, that vehicle (while it may have been the world to you or your "lifeline" to the world) becomes meaningless to us. To us once a vehicle is reposessed, it is just a VIN number on a sheet of things we must dispose of. It may have served its purpose to its owner for a very long time, and it may have been loved and cherished by that owner, but at this point it becomes business. All businesses are in business to make money, not to lose it. It's a sad fact of life that every person in this country must realize.

Addressing Mr. Cyrus' obvious future remarks to my above comment, we do care about our customers. Something I have said repeatedly throughout my reply to this report is that this is an unfortunate situation and we don't want this to happen to anyone. Ruth's account representative allowed her to pay her payments late, he allowed her to continually pay her payments late. She states that she was on a fixed income and always paid her payments two months late, paying before they became three months late. This does not show a lack of concern by her account representative, this shows great concern. He allowed her to do something that many people do not get the option of. When you sign the contract to pay your payments it does not mean "I agree to pay every 30 days, but I can't so I'll pay every 60 days." He allowed her time to pay her payments and then forewarned her that she was approaching three payments due.

As an account representative myself, I speak to customers every day that cannot make their payments. Some can't pay because they are sick or disabled, recently unemployed, divorced, the list goes on. My job purpose is not to harass, annoy, or to pester. Also my job is not to demand money TODAY. Yes, I want you to pay today. I may say that you have to pay today to keep your car - but let's think about it. If you don't have any money to pay today, are you going to be able to pay today? My job is to find out why you can't pay and why you haven't been paying and to see if I can help with the situation. I expect to be treated fairly by those that I deal with, so I treat my customers fairly and with respect regardless of their situation and ability to pay.

Mr. Cyrus states that Toyota Financial Services has $32 billion in assets because we are rude to and cheat our customers. Come on, think about it. If we were rude to our customers and cheated them, would they be back? When you check the Rip-off Report database for automobile finance companies, we have less complaints than most of the other companies out there. A company does not grow to the size of TFS by disrespecting our customers. More than 60% of our automobile financing business is by REPEAT CUSTOMERS. Out of all of the auto loans we write on a daily basis and continue to service for the next five years, only a small percentage are expected to have an exception to the way they are handled. Most auto loans originate in the system and live their lifespan without us ever having to talk to the customer. There are repeat customers of TFS that have financed seven or eight cars with us - that does not show ill treatment towards our customers.

So, again, Ruth I am sorry for what happened to you. I'm sorry that your vehicle was taken away and I hope that you do find out the cause of your communication failure with TFS. If you feel that we have wronged you and that you need to file a complaint against us in your state, that is your right and we ENCOURAGE you to do it. Yes, we encourage you to make sure you are being treated fairly. I hope that your situation gets better and I hope that your injuries heal.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Update By Author

Response to Rebuttal by Toyota Employee "Brantley," Miami

AUTHOR: Ruth - Marshfield (U.S.A.)

Dear Brantley;

Regarding your rebuttal of 10/10/04 to my complaint against Toyota, I wish to thank you for your interest and input. I do take into consideration however, that you are after all, an employee of that corporation.

Yes. The situation brought about by the repossession of my truck was indeed unfortunate for me.

On the other hand, Toyota can handle losing one customer.

They may consider themselves “unfortunate” when they lose many customers by the conclusion of my action against them.

They have already lost two of my two daughters who, instead of Toyota's, recently purchased respectively, a Subaru, and a Chevrolet.

A third daughter has no intention of purchasing a Toyota. So Toyota's hasty repossession of my truck has already cost them thousands of dollars, not to mention some friends of mine who have been “turned off” by the harm done to me.

I am quite sure when it is time for them to trade their current vehicles in, it will not be for Toyota's.

Talk about a “domino effect!” As I also write pieces on the Internet (check “Ruth Lowry” on “Google") , I imagine my readers will be sympathetic to my plight.

Yes, what happened to me does happen on a daily basis. This is what I shall use my journalistic (former Staff Feature Writer and Reporter on three newspapers; foreign correspondent on another) and legal background (certified Paralegal, Pro Se litigant; read law three years in Vermont, argued appeals in Supreme Courts of two States), to put a brake on (no pun intended) such hastily harmful and legal violations by major companies such as Toyota.

True, you do not know me. The folks at TMCC's Tewksbury office thought they knew me but really did not have a clue.

They obviously considered me just a “poor old lady up in the sticks.” I am often underestimated due to my easy-going disposition. In time however, they see the error of their bad judgment … and suffer the consequences.

I have driven my own vehicles for over 58 years; some financed; some purchased outright. NONE were ever repossessed.

In this current situation I was NEVER given “notification of an imminent repossession.”

I did NOT receive a “Notice of Right to Cure Default.”

I was given NO “time to remedy” said “default.” My truck was simply TAKEN. So here is yet another law violated by Toyota.

My file shows that I was NOT “continuously two months late;” your computer system must be out of whack, for I did NOT receive any certifies mail on “the 32nd day” when payments were late.

The Tewksbury office communicated with me concerning late payments by telephone in the person of Mr. Marcos Mieles.

When my truck was taken I was NOT notified that I'd have “10 days to redeem it.” I owed only $2,000. I could possibly have raised that amount if I knew I had 10 days to do so!

As this was my first “repossessed” experience in over a half century of vehicle ownership, I assumed I'd absolutely lost the truck.

I had some $11,000 invested in that truck. It was in excellent condition with only about 83,000 miles on it.

I recently received a statement from a collection agency stating I still owed Toyota $1,985.79.

This indicates my pick-up sold for a mere $14.27!!! This is ludicrous!

Seems like some official's favorite person got a nice present … at my expense.

“Discovery” should shed some light on this possibility.

As stated, people tend to underestimate me. My experience as Director of Public Relations for Empire State College will be handy when it comes to relating my experience with TMCC … to the world.

My situation is not about a $30,000 or even an $18,000 vehicle. It concerns a 1994 used truck priced at $13,500 on which my Toyota hatchback was traded for a value of $2,000, leaving me with a debt of $11,500 to pay off at the rate of $254 a month for five years.

With my husband's death in June of 1997 my financial situation went downhill and late payments resulted. When late, I always paid the $10 late fee.

My father was a Certified Public Accountant. His clients included Hellmann's Mayonnaise, Long Island University, and McGregor Sportswear. He also owned the Art Crayon company in Brooklyn, N.Y.

He too used the phrase, “business is business,” but he demonstrated to me that even “business” must have a heart.

When the workers at his factory went on strike, he walked the picket line with them and provided them with coffee and food.

They objected primarily to the policies of his partner: so did he. I feel sure the gigantic enterprise that is Toyota Motor Corporation would not have imploded if they failed to deprive me of my used but terribly useful to me pick-up truck on which only $2,000 was owed.

A bit of heart and a dab more patience would have gotten their $2,000. Apparently they only got $14.27.

They will NEVER get another cent from me. I am, incidentally in forma pauperis and will proceed as such in court.

Your company's legal fees alone will cost them far more than the $2,000 they were so anxious to get from me.

Mr. Mieles at the Tewksbury office treated me with courtesy and respect.

By all indications it appeared to me that he was under pressure to get my truck.

When it was taken I spoke to his supervisor who was discourteous to the point of being NASTY.

Neither he or Mieles sought my input on WHY I couldn't keep up with payments on time.

Nor did they seek to work something out on the $2,000 balance. If they had cut the payments in half to $127 per month for just a few months until I paid my school taxes, I'd have been able to resume the $254 on time.

Apparently however somebody wanted my truck for a “token” price of $14.27. Perhaps the supervisor?

Incidentally, when my husband was alive we paid for our Toyota hatchback on time and within a year after buying it, we paid it off!

We also bought a slightly used Toyota pick-up for our daughter, paying $5,000 cash in advance, and all payments ON TIME until it was completely paid off!

Frankly, what was done to me was a shoddy way to treat a GOOD Toyota customer. Ill treatment was surely shown to THIS customer.

Though I have not at all been “appreciated” as a customer of Toyota, I must say I appreciate your interest, understanding, and time spent on your “rebuttal.”

Thanks also for the encouragement. I indeed will file a complaint here in Vermont, copies of which will go to our two Senators, our Congressman, the Attorney General, and many others including the Japanese CEO of Toyota here in America.

Sincerely and With Determination


Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.

productive