A volunteer in Chicago claims that her client, a 65-year-old woman with dementia, was given a GMAC auto loan for a new 2007 Pontiac, even though she only makes $900 a month and has no driver’s license. Now the car has been repossessed and the car lot is saying she owes them nearly $8,000.
Here’s Kimberly’s full letter:
I am a volunteer for Catholic Charities and my new client Sandra recently went into Grossinger Auto in Chicago, IL to buy a car. She was approved for a brand new 2007 Pontiac with all the options available by GMAC. She makes $900 a month in social security, has had several strokes so she does not have a valid license, and is in credit card debt up to her eyeballs. She is a 65 year old women who also suffers from Dementia.
GMAC approved her loan even with her bad credit rating! I believe the scam is working. Sandra lives in public housing and there is NO way that she has the credit to get a new car. Yet, GMAC gave her the money to do so.
One month after she failed to make her payment they repossessed the car. Now they say she owes $7,995.80 for the difference of the car and what they got for the car at auction. I have tried repeatedly to get a hold of someone who could explain to me their loan process but was hung up on. They have not responded to my complaints to the Better Business Bureau. I also went to Grossinger Auto and asked how they could sell this woman a car and they also slammed the door in my face. What a creative way to scam!!
Well, “creative” is a pretty polite way of putting it, Kimberly. Forget the BBB—our readers have pointed out time and again that they rarely do any good in these matters. We can’t give legal advice, obviously, but if your charity organization has some sort of legal counsel then you should go talk to that person. We can’t imagine the loan can be considered valid if what you’ve listed is accurate.
You should also contact the Illinois Attorney General’s office. They have a special section on their website dedicated to protecting senior citizens. Call their toll free hotline at 1-800-243-5377 or 1-800-964-3013 (TTY).
Update 3:00pm
Kimberly emailed us an hour ago: “Thanks for the tip. I just got off the phone with their office and they are taking the case!”
(Photo: Getty)
More From Consumerist
-
Why Is Dealership Checking My Credit When I'm Paying In Full?
-
Who Put A Used Battery In My New Car?
-
Investigation Finds Car Dealers Basically Setting Customers Up To Fail So They Can Repossess & Resell Vehicles
-
Website Allows Dealers To Bid On Your Trade-In, But Only The Site’s Owner Seems To Be Bidding
-
Woman Tries To Buy Car, Gets Flagged As Terrorist
@ptr2void: Can you let us know when and where your next family reunion will be? I’d like to attend.
@Darkwish: That really sucks. I sincerely hope they get what they deserve. Grrr…
@backbroken: Heh…my family’s too small for a reunion…we could have it in a Renault LeCar.
All good advice from the Consumerist. The OP should follow through because this deal smells. But I wouldn’t worry about the little old lady. Based on the financial situation outlined she’s judgement-proof. My guess is the lady will never be sued because GMAC won’t want this case to be seen by a judge and SSI can’t be garnisheed, AFAIK. So I wouldn’t worry about the woman’s debts – they can’t and won’t be repaid.
OP – if your organization doesn’t have an attorney on staff, try the Chicago Legal Clinic [www.clclaw.org] , the Center for Disability and Elder Law at 312.908.4463, Chicago Volunteer Legal Services at 312.332.1264, or the Legal Clinic at Northwestern [law.niu.edu] .
How sick. Selling to an old lady who doesn’t even have a license?! There is a special spot in hell reserved for people who take advantage of the elderly.
I know Catholic Charities to be a good group of people offering important and unduplicated services to Chicago. But I urge you to consider what’s best for your client before jumping into possible civil or legal proceedings. If you think she’s ok where she’s living despite her dementia, help her work it out with debt collectors but don’t get the police involved because she could lose her home.
Did she ever drive the car? Are you sure? If she did (or you think she did even if she didn’t tell you), I strongly urge you to look up unsolved traffic crimes in her area like hit and runs or property damage. If there is anything linking her to them, even tenuously, filing criminal charges against Grossinger will eventually uncover this and endanger her standing legally. If she lives in Public Housing she will be evicted. Do your homework before the police do.
Be very careful about exposing this! Your client could end up getting out of her car debt but homeless.
The license issue could happen here in FL. I am 72, still of sound mind (my wife may have a different opinion). I just renewed my license and it is good until 2014. If the granny had a license under these conditions, she could have had a license laying around for years that was still legally valid that no one knew about. I don’t know the length of term Illinois will issue licenses but in a state like FL, it would be wise if they reduced the time it is valid and require driving tests for anyone over ________ (fill in the blank)
If she has no assets and her only source of income is SSN, I’d simply tell the dealership/GMAC to pound sand. Per the facts she has lousy credit already, so another mark there isn’t the end of the road. Since she live in public housing, I assume she doesn’t have other assets. She’s up to her eyeballs in CC debt so it’s doubtful she has a big savings account somewhere.
Yes, it sucks that she had to deal with this, but the reality is at this point, there isn’t any more the dealership or GMAC can do to the lady. They can’t garnish her wages or attach assets since she doesn’t have any. Thankfully, we don’t have debtors prison’s they could threaten her with. Under the Fair Debt Collections Act she can ask them to quit harrasing her, if they are doing that.
The cool thing is that the dealership actually has probably LOST money in the deal. They probably sold the car for much less after the repo than they could have in just making a legitimate sale in the first place. Since they have no legal way of collecting that additional “loss” from the original buyer it’s their loss. Every now and then Karma does pay a visit I guess.
If I was the original poster, I’d tell the dealership “Good Luck collecting on this, jerks!” and move on the next of I’m sure a long line of other cases to deal with.
Now we know why there is a credit crisis.
This was sent to my email account by a reader—thought I’d add it to the comments for future reference:
- – - -
Hi there. I’m an avid reader of The Consumerst, and this particular article caught my eye, as my employer may be able to help Sandra. We provide free legal assistance to low-income residents of Cook County. Feel free to pass on our phone number (312-341-1070) and our intake specialists will take it from there. Our website’s at [www.lafchicago.org] if you would like to learn more about us.
-Eric
- – - -
Hooray for Lisa Madigan! (The IL Attorney General)
Hooray for the Illinois AG. I’m glad they decided to pick this up.
@ViperBorg: You don’t always need a license to drive. A farm pickup truck is a good example. A stock car is another.
I think the OP needs to contact her relatives and a judge, hold a competency hearing, and get a guardian appointed. Have the guardian declare bankruptcy, and the guardian can post a change of address to his/her office, send the credit reporting agencies his phone number to replace the current one, and forward letters from relatives, etc., and burn the credit card offers.
The current creditors can go pound sand.
@NoWin: Believe it or not, many GM cars don’t sell in the year they were produced. A new 07 could have easily been purchased in 08.
@whydidnt: I know what you are saying, but now she becomes a target for a collection agency. Convince her that she better pay something every month or she is going to jail. Great racket all around.
Although the dementia may be all that is needed to invalidate the loan, that fact that her income and credit shouldn’t have let her qualify means these people fudged the numbers. After all the fallout from bad home loans involving the same tactic, this car dealer is probably going to be in some serious legal trouble.
@Howie411: Me too. Screw GM. I’ll never buy another! My Grand Prix with the 3.1 engine just had the head gasket fail. Turns out it is a undeniable issue with 1996ish-2004 GM cars with the 3.1. They make the gasket out of plastic and the coolant eats it away. They have known for over a decade, but have never issued a recall. I hope their entire scum sucking, gas guzzling company crashes in flames!
@kilrathi: Is there a link to that?
@rellog: Nevermind, I didn’t see the update…
I don’t know that I’d go around saying the BBB is of no help. A few years ago I had an ordeal with that scam artist Roni Lynn Deutch to help iron out a tax issue. In short, she accomplished nothing while jerking us around for months. I sent copies of my communications with her to both the BBB and the state attorney general. While the AG’s office was genuinely interested in the situation, I get the impression that the BBB was the one primarily responsible for getting the majority of my money back from the shark.
Always notify the BBB…it can’t HURT!
An elderly woman with dementia is considered an “vulnerable adult” and in many jurisdictions abusing a vulnerable adult is a crime – depending on the severity of the abuse, the crime can rise to a felony. This case does potentially rise to the felony level.
Going to the Attorney General is the right thing in this case since the situation is essentially financial fraud. But, remember they want this resolved with the least amount of muss and fuss, and the AG doesn’t represent the woman, it represents the state – the woman should have her own attorney – be it a legal aid attorney or one doing pro-bono work for Catholic Charities.
Typically what will happen is that a staff member of the AGs office will research other state consumer agencies for similar complaints versus the dealer and GMAC. They will typically contact both sides of the dispute to gather facts. Two of the key facts are the degree of dementia and whether it was noticeable by a reasonable person.
If this is the only occurence, the AG staff or the state consumer protection agency at the direction of the AG will negotiate a settlement between the parties, although in this case because it is so egregious, they probably will request the dealership and GMAC to eat the loss, since they shouldn’t have sold the car and shouldn’t have financed it. If the dealer and GMAC do that, it’s end of the story. In short, they try to work this out without going to court. Also expect the dealership and GMAC to point fingers at each other and haggle about how much of any settlement is their’s to accept.
However, if the dealership and GMAC refuse, a civil suit is likely. Civil suits are easier to prosecute than criminal charges. If there is a pattern of such behaviors the AG may file a larger civil suit, but if there numbers of incidents are large, there is enough evidence to make one or more felony charges stick on one or more individuals, they may go for that instead.
One thing that is odd here is that there is no mention of a guardian or someone with power of attorney – certainly a person with significant dementia should have one.
Deplorable yes. But I’m truly confused by the repeated statements about not being able to buy a car without a valid driver’s license. I just don’t understand. Surely there are non-drivers who purchase cars for someone else to drive, whether the very rich, or just old Uncle Sam who buys the car so that his nephew can drive him where he wants/needs to go. Possibly even as a gift. Seems to me that could be legitimate. COuldn’t the ‘owner’ & the ‘operator’ be two different people?
PONTIAC = Poor Old…hmm…we’ll make it Nana in this case…Thinks It’s A Cadillac