Ripoff Report Needs Your Help!
X  |  CLOSE
Report: #435250

Complaint Review: Chicago Lenders - Mesa Arizona

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Mesa Arizona
  • Author Confirmed What's this?
  • Why?
  • Chicago Lenders S. Country Club Dr. Mesa, Arizona U.S.A.

Chicago Lenders Repossesed vehicle when it was vandalized and interferred with insurance and police investigation Mesa Arizona

*Consumer Suggestion: Interference?

*Author of original report: re Customer Comment

*Consumer Comment: All I Can Say Is

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Report about YOU
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
How to fix
Ripoff Report
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

I am writing about my experience with Chicago Lenders/Cactus Jacks. I had a good relationship with Chicago Lenders until October last year. I bought several cars from Cactus Jacks over the last four years and had nothing negative to say about them. I even recommended them to other family members. My account became behind due to a error on their part because they didn't run my debit card when the payments were due as agreed. I did not hear from Chicago Lenders for awhile, thinking that my payments were caught up and being made. On January 3, 2009, my vehicle was vandalized by a former friend who put unknown chemicals into the fuel tank.

My 1999 Dodge Caravan was a flex fuel van and was great on the wallet. I contacted the police and filed a police report, filed a claim with my insurance company for the vandalism and thought everything was OK. I got a call the next day from my mother in law that Cactus Jack/Chicago Lenders were threatening to report the van stolen. The funny thing was that they would have filed a false report because they knew where the van was if they wanted to come get it. I had told Frances the manager that the van was a crime scene and that my insurance company was initiating an investigation into the vandalism.

On 1/21/2009 at midnight a repo man came and picked up the van. I had told them that they were interfering with a criminal and insurance investigation, I had showed them the police report and the insurance claim information. They took the van anyway. Luckily earlier in the day an insurance field adjuster came and took a fuel sample because the tank was 1/2 full still. The next day I contacted Chicago Lenders and informed them that they were interfering with that investigation and Frances did not care. I owed a bill and that was it. Period.

When the original fuel sample was lost, Progressive Insurance tried to get a second sample but the Repo people were not interested in allowing the field agent to do his job. When the agent was able to get to the van, the fuel tank was empty. So a second sample could not be taken.

On March 8, 2009 I received a letter from the Legal Department of Chicago Lenders saying that they will sue me if I don't pay the balance because they sold the van at auction, instead of doing what Progressive said to do and that was to take the van to a mechanic for a diagnostic at Progressive's expense, and then wait for payment to pay off the balance owed due to having a clause in my policy to pay off any loan balance. When I talked to the lady at the legal department, she lied to me about Progressive not wanting to pay the balance. So I called Progressive and confirmed that was not the case, and the claims rep told me that they were waiting for Chicago Lenders to follow their instructions and wait for payment.

Well, Chicago Lenders sent me a threatening letter about suing me for the balance. So I contacted them and advised them that any legal action taken against me will be met with a counter suit for damages caused by their actions and interference in preventing a vandal from being arrested and prosecuted and denying my insurance company to make whole me and Chicago Lenders for the damages made by that vandal. In my view they lost out because of their impatience and greed. They were given a specific set of directives by Progressive to get paid, they didn't follow through. It is their loss, not mine to bear.

Robert
Mesa, Arizona
U.S.A.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/18/2009 12:24 AM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/chicago-lenders/mesa-arizona-85210/chicago-lenders-repossesed-vehicle-when-it-was-vandalized-and-interferred-with-insurance-a-435250. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

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

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

Updates & Rebuttals

REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author
3Consumer
0Employee/Owner

#3 Consumer Suggestion

Interference?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 04, 2009

Hardly.

First. The police were DONE with any need to visit your van again. If the police felt that they would need to investigate the VAN they would have IMPOUNDED it rather than leave it in your possession. The fact that the police left the vehicle in your position means that the police were finished with the vehicle.

Second. Insurance companies work WITH LENDERS all the time and they KNOW that the lien holder is going to take possession of the van so that no NEW DAMAGES occur. The fact that the insurance company took a sample of gas and left the vehicle with you indicates that the insurance company was finished with the van.

Thus, your claim that repossessing the vehicle interfered with an ongoing investigation by taking a "crime scene" is utter rubbish.

There is a tenant in all US jurisdictions of "chain of custody" for evidence. Once the police looked the van over and left it with you - THEY ARE DONE examining the vehicle. Anything they might find in/on the vehicle after they have made an initial examination and LEFT the vehicle with you is not admissable in court-hence the police were finished with it.

Insurance companies do not investigate crime scenes-that falls on law enforcement. All the insurance adjuster does is VERIFY what damage exists with the vehicle. They do not determine "who caused what" with the damage-only that damage exists, to what extent, and estimate the cost of repair.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

re Customer Comment

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 04, 2009

Dude you are a moron...I know that my story sounds like a good piece of fiction, but like they say there is nothing stranger than the facts. I had an agreement for the auto payments, I have records that they had not made any contact, since I do not have a land line, I only have a cell phone, and thus every call is present is listed. I learned my lesson from an incident a few years ago, in relation to the Chandler Police Department. This lender did interfere with a police and insurance investigation, I have the documents to prove that, I have lab reports from the insurance company, because a couple of days later they found the sample there was a screw up at the lab. Oh, yeah, there is now a warrant for the arrest by the police for the vandal who did this to start with, I was called by the Police two days ago. So yeah truth is stranger than fiction, but I only deal with the facts. That is how i was trained as a correctional officer and that is how I ensure that I dont get screwed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1 Consumer Comment

All I Can Say Is

AUTHOR: Cory - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 18, 2009

This story is so full of holes. "They didn't run my debit card when the payments were due as agreed". How did they run your debit card or did they? I mean if they didn't, didn't you find it kind of odd that the car company WASN'T taking money out of your account for your car payment? "I did not hear from Chicago Lenders for awhile thinking my that my payments were caught up and being made". AGAIN, didn't it dawn on you that you had more money in your account IF the payments hadn't been made. AND, IF the payments HAD'T been made, I guarantee some two bit used car company would be on the phone 5 times a day trying to get in contact with the person who owes them money. The reason the car company was going to report the vehicle stolen was because they hadn't been paid. Your wording is really interesting cause I've seen it before. IF certain terms of a contract aren't accurate or furfilled in a proper manner a vehicle CAN be reported as stolen in a criminal case as opposed to a civil matter. Kind of like those rent to own places CAN file theft charges if certain situations are furfilled. That whole "unknown chemical" line sounds like so much BS. I like the way you throw in the crime scene and insurance investigation. More BS. It's real interesting how the first sample got "lost".

Also amazing how the tank got from half full to empty before the agent got back out there. IF there had been an "unknown agent" that would have cause damage, how would have someone driven it long enough to empty out the half tank? I know some unknown "agent" snuck into the repo lot and sucked the gas out of your 99 dodge caravan. What do they say about a good offense? You didn't make the payments and you're threatening to SUE THEM? Good luck. You might however have a job in fiction writing or the TV or movie industry.

Respond to this report!
What's this?
Featured Reports

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.

X
What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

WATCH News
Segment Now