Santander Reaches $550 Million Settlement With 34 States Over Alleged Deceptive Auto Loan Practices
Santander, the nation's largest subprime auto financing company, settled claims of loan improprieties with 34 states to the tune of $550 million.
May 20, 2020 at 05:19 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Connecticut Law Tribune
Thirty-four states, including Connecticut, California, Florida, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania, have reached a $550 million settlement with automotive financing company Santander Consumer USA Inc. to reimburse consumers for alleged deceptive loan practices nationwide.
The multistate agreement with the nation's largest subprime auto financing company calls on the Dallas, Texas-based business to follow certain provisions, including knowing a customer's ability to repay their loans. It also prohibits the company from purchasing loans, if it knows consumers would have little or no money left after paying for housing and other expenses.
The settlement provides California with the bulk of the money, about $99 million for consumers in that state. New York will receive $27 million; New Jersey about $3.1 million; Florida about $7.7 million; Pennsylvania about $14.7 million, and $391,222 for Connecticut's consumers.
The settlement was good news for prosecutors in several states.
"For years, Santander put Connecticut borrowers at financial risk," Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said in a statement. "This settlement includes significant loan relief for customers as well as injunctive measures to assure that this kind of behavior won't happen again."
New York Attorney General Letitia James wrote in a statement: "As New Yorkers continue to struggle from the financial impact of the coronavirus, we have stopped this company from continuing its fraudulent practices and have helped keep more than $27 million in the pockets of New Yorkers. Santander defrauded desperate consumers by placing them into auto loans the company knew these customers could never afford to pay, resulting in defaults and negative ratings on consumers' credit reports."
And California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement: "Santander profited by approving high-cost loans to disadvantaged auto buyers who were doomed from the start. These predatory loan practices have hurt countless families who are being hit hard by today's economic climate. This settlement should be a warning to the industry that we are committed to protecting consumers from abusive business practices."
In California, for example, the press release from Becerra's office states that, with regard to his state, "Consumers with the lowest quality loans who had defaulted as of Dec. 31, 2019 and have not had their cars repossessed, will be allowed to keep their cars."
No one from Santander's media relations team responded to a request for comment Wednesday.
In February 2018, Connecticut and Santander reached a $2.9 million settlement over repossessed cars. In that case, the settlement money was used to credit, waive or refund the accounts of nearly 4,000 Connecticut consumers whose vehicles were repossessed. The company also agreed to pay a $100,000 fine.
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'The Court Will Take Action': Judge Upbraids Combative Rudy Giuliani During Outburst at Hearing
Trump’s DOE Pick Could Spell Trouble for Title IX Enforcement, Higher Ed Funding
4 minute readConsumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250