I really wish I could give 0 stars, because I definitely would. We got a car from Superior Auto in Madisonville back in 2019 and as reflected by credit report, we paid the car off in full. After awhile of making payments, they began charging his account multiple times a day within a week WITHOUT HIS CONSENT, so we contacted them and advised them that they didn't have permission to take money from his account without authorization first. At which point, they attempted to take him to court for $9,000 that he DOES NOT owe them. We had written up a response to their claim, then like crickets! We didn't hear anything else about it. Some time had passed and we decided we wanted to sell the car. We go to get another title since the original one was lost; and see their information on it as an active lien holder... STILL! At this point, we contacted the business to inquire about getting a lien release and was informed that my vehicle had been categorized as being in wreck and labeled a total loss in their system and that they had received gap insurance for totality of payment for the vehicle. Confused about this, because the vehicle hasn't been wrecked or totaled, he began asking questions and informed them that we have the car, that it was never wrecked, and that we didn't even know where that information came from... the employee tells him she doesn't know what to tell him and hangs up. Now, a week after telling us that our car was totaled, they are garnishing his check for amounts that are completely unaffordable to him. My thing is, if they really felt like we owed them anything, especially that much, why would they not just repossess the vehicle!? How can they get their money, then turn around and say it's been wrecked, receive their money again, and then garnish his check on top of that to receive their payment a THIRD TIME!? Is there even anything we can do!? He has an upcoming civil conference date in court... on the papers served to him, it says that it is with Community United Methodist Hospital. We called the clerks office to discuss this issue with SAC and they informed us that the upcoming case is actually with SAC.