Several payments on my simple interest loan from Chrysler were misapplied and I was charged future interest, which according to Chrysler, they do not do. I have made several requests to someone to explain the charges, and these have been refused. I have been repeatedly told that they do not know why the payments were applied like that. I have been calling since 01/02/10 about payments that I have made on my account.
My loan is a simple interest loan that has consistently been paid ahead since June 2008, three months after my loan originated. Upon seeing that my extra payments were not being applied to the principle, but to interest only, I called and was told that it was no problem to have Chrysler adjust these payments. At this point, I did not express which payments should be adjusted.
A few days later, I was charged a past due amount on my account and my balance was approximately $2,000 more than what it had been. I then specified that I did not want to owe more than I already had and spoke with someone that said that he would have the payments adjusted so that any additional would be applied to principle and that he would have it done so that there would be no past due amount on the account.
Around 01/06/10 or 01/07/10, I called in to address the past due amount and have my payments readjusted. I spoke with a man and informed him that I should not be past due, as I was paid ahead, so I wanted to have my payments readjusted to correct this. He asked me, "What are you trying to pull?" I explained that I should not be past due and eventually spoke with another associate about the issue. After speaking with the later associate, about a day later, my balance was at the lowest it had been. I then noticed that the number of payments made in 2008 had not originally been applied correctly.
On 01/08/10, I called in again to have these payments correctly applied so that the interest paid was only the actual interest due, not future interest, and the rest applied to principle. This too was done incorrectly, and I again owed more, with a past due amount and charges resulting from this.
On 01/11/10, I called in, was placed on hold and connected to collections. I informed the man that I should not be in collections, as I had been paid ahead but had payments adjusted, and that I just needed them to be readjusted and requested that he connect me with customer service. He replied, "You are not calling the shots, ma'am." He then said that he would take a look at the account. I was placed on hold for five minutes. He said that he would connect me to customer service. I was told by the customer service rep that my account was in collections and could not be brought up. I requested that I not be transferred to collections and was again placed on hold for five minutes.
I was eventually connected with Mr. ** and we discussed correcting the payments and reapplying to take my account current. He said that he would call me in a week after the account had been adjusted. He never called. On 01/13/10, I spoke with Ms. ** about my account. She informed me that the work order had been completed, but I informed her that the payment made on 04/15/09 had not been reapplied per my last conversation.
I called on 01/27/10 to inquire why the payments from June 2008 to August 18, 2008 had not been correctly applied. As per my conversation with numerous Chrysler employees, Chrysler does not charge future interest. The man said that he could not explain why this was and faxed me a copy of all my payments and the adjustments that had been made. He also put in a request for someone from the financing department to contact me by Tuesday of the following week.
On 01/29/10, I called in again to make sure that I understood my loan correctly so I could make sure that my current balance calculations were correct, as to what it should have been--had the June 2008 and August 2008 had been applied correctly, and funds were not misappropriated. Again, I was told that Chrysler does not charge future interest and the representative was unable to explain what the charges were.
I requested that my payments be readjusted to what they were when my balance reflected it was at its lowest point, via adjustments Chrysler had made--that was reflected on a 07/14/09 payment. I also requested that the June 2008 and August 2008 payments be reapplied correctly as regular payments, as they should have been the first time they posted. Again, I repeated my request to speak with someone that could explain the misappropriated funds,
On 02/04/10, I received a phone call from the resolution department and he said that he could not explain what happened in 2008, as he did not understand the finances. I again requested that the 2008 payments be applied as regular payments and requested that a payment made on 01/04/10, 1/26/10 and 02/01/10 be applied to principle only. I also said to please leave the 01/18/10 as is, a regular payment. I informed him that I was disputing the balance until my payments were adjusted properly and requested that no per diem interest accrue until this matter had been solved.
On 02/05/10, I looked at my account online. None of the 2008 adjustments were made and the 01/18/10 payment had been applied to the principle only, as a curtailment. I spoke with a woman and asked if there was anyone I could speak to that had answers about the financing and how payments had been applied in 2008. Again, I was met with, "You cannot speak with anyone from that department," and she repeated that they do not charge future interest.
She offered to put a supervisor on the phone and I declined, unless they could explain those charges. I again requested that the 2008 payments be reapplied as regular payments and requested that the 01/18/10 be applied as a regular payment. I informed the representative to note that I was disputing the balance until my payments were adjusted properly and requested that no per diem interest accrue until this matter had been solved, and she replied that it was not possible.
On 02/06/10, I spoke with two associates, one named Lucy **. I asked Ms. ** as to why the changes to my account for the 2008 payments had not yet been made. She told me it takes four to five days. I informed her that some changes had been made on 02/05/10, including one I did not authorize. She informed me that there had only been a complaint made. I told her this was incorrect and pointed out the fact that a payment for 02/01/10 had just been adjusted per that 02/04/10 conversation. She told me I was wrong and was actually requested on 01/29/10. I again told her she was incorrect and she then transferred me to Laura.
I informed Laura that in the past, when I asked associates for their employee number, they told me that they did not have one and could only give me a last name. She informed me that no employees were allowed to give out last names and could only give out employee numbers. Again, I was informed that she could not explain the payments. She also read back to me the work orders and what had been noted on the account, after I told her there was a work order placed on 02/04/10, which she said there was not.
I expressed my concern to her that people were not noting what the requests were or our conversations correctly. I inquired about the 01/18/10 curtailment and asked if it could be done without a customer request. She informed me no and told me that I requested it. I informed her I did not and asked her to go through the work order request history. Finally, she was able to find a work order from 02/04/10. She did not find a request for 01/18/10 other than one made on 02/04/10 to apply as regular payment, which was how it was applied at that time.
She said that she would have a manager contact me on Monday, February 08, 2010, at 16:30 EST that could explain the charges. I again specified that the 01/18/10, which was never authorized to be applied as a curtailment, be applied as a regular payment, as it had been originally. I again made my request to have the 2008 payments adjusted.