State and Santander Reach $2.9M Settlement Over Repossessed Cars
The state Department of Banking and Santander have signed off on a consent order in which the two sides agreed on a $2.9 million settlement related to the repossessing of motor vehicles in Connecticut. The company also paid a $100,000 fine.
February 21, 2018 at 12:39 PM
2 minute read
The state Department of Banking and Santander Consumer USA have announced a $2.9 million settlement that will credit, waive or refund the accounts of 3,730 Connecticut consumers whose vehicles were repossessed.
Santander does not acknowledge wrongdoing, but in the consent order signed by both parties Tuesday, the Illinois-based financial services company agreed to pay a $100,000 fine.
The consent order alleges Santander failed to provide written itemized statements to consumers showing how the proceeds of the sale of their repossessed vehicle were disbursed within 30 days, as required by law. The department also alleges the company improperly charged convenience fees on payments made by credit or debit cards from Oct. 1, 2016, through Jan. 19.
In the consent order, Santander assured Department of Banking Commissioner Jorge Perez it ceased charging convenience fees after Jan. 19. Santander also said the alleged violations will not occur in the future.
“I am happy thousands of Connecticut consumers have seen relief as a result of our department's continued efforts to protect residents and ensure companies are following the law,” Perez said in a statement. “It is critical that we maintain our vigilance with a watchful eye so we can minimize risks to our consumers.”
The commissioner, through the Consumer Credit Division of the Department of Banking, conducted an examination of Santander's records between Aug. 5, 2016, through Oct. 24, 2016. As a result of the examination, the department claimed the company failed to accurately calculate the deficient balances on repossessed vehicles.
The consent order was signed by Perez and Raymond Scott, Santander's deputy general counsel.
No one from Santander responded to a request for comment Wednesday.
Matt Smith, a spokesperson for the Department of Banking, said Wednesday the agreement is “an example of how good common-sense regulations work.”
This content has been archived.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 AllArt of the Settlement: Trump Attorney Reveals Strategy in ABC Lawsuit
Attorney Overcomes Low Medical Bills, Captures $1 Million Policy Limit
2 minute readConn. Appeals Court Slices $150 Million in Statutory Damages From Judgment Owed by Alex Jones
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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