Auto Lender Lobbyists’ Last Stand in the Senate

By The White House on 05/24/2010 – 12:12 pm PST -- Headlines

Later this afternoon, the Senate will vote on a motion to instruct conferees on the Brownback Amendment.  That basically means members of the Senate will cast a nonbinding vote on whether or not they think the House and Senate conferees should consider carving out a loophole for auto dealers that make auto loans from the financial reform bill.

The President has been clear on this issue, repeatedly urging members of the Senate to fight efforts of the special interests and their lobbyists to weaken consumer protections.  The fact is, auto dealer-lending is an $850 billion industry, which is larger than the entire credit card industry and they make nearly 80 percent of the automobile loans in our country. 

Is there any question that these lenders should be subject to the same standards as any local or community bank that provides loans?

Auto dealer-lenders sell auto loans to working families every single day, and while most dealers are no doubt above board, some cannot resist the bigger profits that come from inflating rates, hiding fees, and tacking on over-priced add-ons.

These profits can lead some dealers to treat their customers unfairly. There are countless stories of hard-working people who are never even contacted when their car loans are promised by dealers and then fail to go through forcing them to borrow at a higher interest rate or to swallow the cost already paid toward the purchase of their car while giving up the vehicle.

People like Lacie Riso and Jarred Whited, a sailor on the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, as NPR reported: 

Riso, 18, and Whited, 20, an aviation ordnance man, needed a car because their old one was breaking down. They went to a dealer near their base in San Diego and found a used Hyundai Sonata they  liked. Then, Riso says, the salesman contacted a finance company. 

"And they say, you know, ‘We’ll approve them. They need to pay $394 a month.’ So we are like, you know, we can do that; that’s fine," she says. 

Riso and Whited got the keys. They left Riso’s old Ford Focus as a trade-in. The next day, they went back to the dealer to set up an automatic payment to the finance company from Whited’s military  paycheck. 

But after several weeks, the finance company said the loan wasn’t approved after all. The couple then asked the dealer for new payment information. 

"So we say, you know, ‘What bank do we pay this to? What’s the account number? What’s the loan number that you have?’ And he told us, ‘No, I don’t have anything like that. You can pay me cash or  personal check to me at the dealership

Pages: 1 2

  • CJR

    Those practices are alrady illegal under state and federal law, addding another layer of government bureaucracy will not stop bad players from those practices – Attorney General investigations and lawsuits in the states will shut them down with punitive damages. Why punish 99% of small businesses with new expensive and burdensome regulations for the problems at 1% of the businesses – is this really your view of how the federal government should get involved in citizen’s every day life?

  • Ray Ingalsbe

    You are correctly calling them “auto dealer lenders” as it is the dealers themselves who are the creditors in their installment transactions. And, it is the dealers alone who illegally cancel the installment contract on the false claim that “the bank rejected your credit.” The “bank” may have refused to accept assignment of the contract at the amount of financing requested by the dealer, which means that the proposed assignee wouldn’t buy the dealer’s obligation at the profit margin the dealer built into the contract. The dealer in turn refuses to give up a dollar in profit and chooses instead to defraud the buyer bu calling her back to the dealership and demanding more money in downpayment so as to maintain its profit margin or, worse, to increase its profit. This is actual theft and it occurs thousands of times a day across the country. It’s euphemistically called “spot delivery”. It is criminal fraud, and the Brownback amendment is an attempt to perpetuate this fraud.

    I am a consumer lawyer and I deal with this dealer fraud on a daily basis and have written legal memoranda on the subject. Dealers say that they are “arranging” loans. It is a lie. Any proposed assignee is not a creditor under the Truth in Lending Act. For example, Bank of America is a “creditor” only when the consumer dealls directly with the bank. In dealer installment transactions, Bank of America is an “assignee”, not a creditor. See the Official Staff Commentary on Regulation Z at 12 C.F.R. s. 226.2(a)(17) “Assignees.”

    Please do whatever you can to defeat the Brownback proposal exempting auto dealers from th Consumer Finance Protection Bill.

blog comments powered by Disqus