CONCORD, NH (WGME) — A coalition of 13 state attorneys general, including New Hampshire, has filed a lawsuit against national lender OneMain Financial, alleging the company charged consumers hundreds of millions of dollars in hidden fees tied to loan “add-on” products.

The lawsuit claims OneMain Financial packed installment loans with optional products such as insurance policies that consumers either did not request, did not need, or did not fully understand they were purchasing.

New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella said the lawsuit aims to hold the company accountable for allegedly increasing the cost of loans for borrowers seeking financial relief.

“Our complaint alleges that OneMain marketed installment loans to Granite Staters seeking financial relief, then increased the cost of those loans through add-on products that consumers did not clearly request or knowingly agree to,” Formella said in a statement. “New Hampshire families trying to make ends meet deserve straightforward terms, not hidden costs. Companies that fail to provide transparency and fair dealing, as required by our consumer protection laws, should expect our office to take action to ensure a fair and honest marketplace.”

According to the complaint, OneMain Financial, which operates five branches in New Hampshire, allegedly used a “bait-and-switch” sales process that hid add-on products within lengthy loan documents. Investigators claim those products significantly inflated the cost of loans that were already high-interest.

Attorneys general allege the company sometimes pre-loaded loans with add-ons before closing, rushed customers through the paperwork process, and buried references to the products within dozens of pages of legal documents. In some cases, the lawsuit claims loans were finalized on smartphones, making already small contract text even harder to read.

In addition to New Hampshire, the lawsuit was filed by the attorneys general of Colorado, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Maine is not part of the lawsuit. However, OneMain Financial does operate a location in Scarborough.

In a statement, the company denied the allegations and said it plans to fight the case in court.

“The states’ allegations are simply untrue — their case is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law and attempts to relitigate issues that were already reviewed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and fully resolved,” the company said.

“We operate honestly and transparently, in full compliance with all laws and regulations, as we provide responsible and much needed access to credit for hardworking Americans. This matter does not change how we operate our business or serve our customers. We will litigate this case vigorously and look forward to proving the truth in court.”

The lawsuit comes about three years after OneMain Financial agreed to pay $20 million to settle federal allegations that it pressured employees to sell add-on products to borrowers. The company did not admit wrongdoing in that settlement.

If successful, the lawsuit seeks restitution for consumers who were charged for the add-on products, civil penalties, and the return of profits obtained through the alleged practices. The states are also asking a court to bar OneMain from continuing the practices and to withdraw negative credit reports tied to the disputed products.

New Hampshire officials say consumers who believe they were affected by the company’s practices can file a complaint with the state’s Department of Justice Consumer Protection and Antitrust Bureau.

CONCORD, NH — A woman from Manchester is facing another driving under the influence charge after a crash on Airport Road in Concord in January.

Around 4:30 p.m. on Jan. 31, officers were sent to the area of Manchester Street and Airport Road for a report of a crash. The caller told dispatch the driver, a woman, had driven into a snowbank, and she smelled like alcohol, according to an affidavit.

The first officer arrived and found a 2014 Subaru Forester between the road and Concord Nissan. The SUV had airbag deployment and “the undercarriage seemed to be destroyed,” the officer wrote.

The officer approached the SUV and spoke to the operator, identified later as Nicole E. Roy, 37, of Youville Street in Manchester, and accused her of having “bloodshot and glassy” eyes. She also had “thick, slow, slurred speech,” and smelled like alcohol, the reporting officer said.

Editor’s note: This post was derived from information supplied by the Concord Police Department and Concord District Court and does not indicate a conviction. This link explains how to request the removal of a name from New Hampshire Patch police reports.

“I asked her what happened and she spoke too softly for me to understand her,” the office wrote in the report. “She then told me her ex-boyfriend was calling her, and she drove off the road.”

Fire and rescue teams were requested and evaluated her, but she declined services, the report said. While she was being checked, the reporting officer spoke to a witness, a man in his early 20s, who reported seeing her “drive off the road at a high rate of speed.” When the witness approached the vehicle to see if the driver was OK, he accused her of smelling like alcohol and being impaired, the report stated.

When asked if she had anything to drink, Roy said she had not, the officer wrote. The officer then asked if she had hit her head or were injured and she said no, due to wearing a seatbelt.

Roy was requested to take a field sobriety test and was unsteady on her feet and nearly fell when exiting the vehicle, the affidavit said. She walked in the new, deep snow, and into the parking lot of Concord Nissan, but was accused of struggling.

“I was concerned she was going to fall,” the officer wrote. “Roy refused my assistance.”

After going through three sets of tests, the officer asked if she was being honest about her alcohol consumption, the report said. When asked why she smelled like alcohol and her eyes displayed signs of impairment, she told the officer she smoked cannabis around 11 a.m., the report said.

Roy was arrested and “showed a variety of emotions” during the trip to police headquarters for processing, “from being nice, to crying, to yelling at (the officer) in a short span of time,” the affidavit said.

At the police station, Roy was accused of being unsteady on her feet and smelling of alcohol after being taken out of the cruiser. She walked into a wall on the ramp inside the stationhouse, a report said.

The officer also called the owner of the Subaru, who “refused to pick her up,” and called Roy “an alcoholic,” according to an affidavit.

Roy was accused of displaying “a range of emotions” while calling three people to assist her, the report said.

The officer also noted Roy was convicted of driving under the influence in Hooksett District Court in May 2023.

On Feb. 2, she pleaded not guilty to the charges.

On Feb. 5, she was granted a public defender.

Do you have a news tip? Email it to tony.schinella@patch.com. View videos on Tony Schinella’s YouTube or Rumble channels. Patch in New Hampshire is now in 217 communities — and expanding every day. Also, follow Patch on Google Discover.

PORTSMOUTH — New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan is expected to attend the Monday, March 16 City Council meeting in the wake of a controversy about SchoolCare’s demand for a $1.57 million payment from the city, according to Mayor Deaglan McEachern.

SchoolCare, a nonprofit risk pool that works to provide health insurance to all the city’s school employees and 90 school districts statewide, stated “if any” town or city “failed to pay the assessment, then SchoolCare may stop paying claims on insured members,” Deputy City Attorney Trevor McCourt previously told the council.

SchoolCare is overseen by the secretary of state’s office.

McEachern stressed during a March 13 interview “we need to be able to provide health care for our teachers, that’s the highest priority we have in these discussions.”

McEachern, in his letter, thanked Scanlan for his “willingness, expressed through our conversation … to come to Portsmouth to discuss these issues at the City Council meeting on March 16. The city’s concerns arise from the extraordinary assessment SchoolCare recently imposed on its members.”

More: Fight with insurer jeopardizes Dover, Portsmouth educators’ healthcare

The mayor went on to write, “SchoolCare reported approximately $29.5 million in reserves as of June 30, 2023; those reserves were depleted quickly, and SchoolCare now reports an operational deficit. … The size and timing of the assessment have had immediate and serious impacts on taxpayers.”

Portsmouth counteroffer rejected by SchoolCare

Stating “Portsmouth seeks to approach this situation constructively,” McEachern’s letter describes a counteroffer.

“While the city does not agree that risk pools have statutory or contractual authority to levy assessments of this nature, we want to remain part of a stable, effective pool and contribute to a reasonable solution,” McEachern said.

He wrote Portsmouth is proposing to pay $247,660.71 and the remaining $1,322,945.07 over a two-year period to avoid the “disruption” paying the full amount.

The mayor confirmed that when McCourt recently appeared before SchoolCare’s Board of Directors, Portsmouth’s counteroffer was rejected. But he stated Portsmouth remains “willing to work with SchoolCare to make sure our teachers get the health care they deserve.”

What mayor is expecting from secretary of state

McEachern said based on his conversation with Scanlan, he expects the secretary of state to “come tell us why this is legal, and answer any questions we have. I look forward to that.”

McEachern stressed Portsmouth would not be “bullied” by SchoolCare into paying an assessment it believes is not legal under state law. He added if SchoolCare were to stop paying claims filed by Portsmouth’s school employees “that would be a breach of the contract.”

“We’re looking at all available options,” McEachern said. “We believe we have made fair and legal offers to SchoolCare, and want to be able to have our teachers have no interruption in their health coverage. Unfortunately they’ve taken the tack that they have. It’s not a just or fair thing to do.”

He expects that after city councilors hears from Scanlan, they could have a discussion about next steps.

“ We may have to talk to our legal counsel first,” McEachern said.

McEachern says solution should be rate-setting, not billing taxpayers

McEachern maintained in his letter to Scanlan “this assessment raises broader policy concerns warranting your direct attention given your statutory responsibilities.

“It was levied contrary to state law, the membership agreements and SchoolCare Board policies, without a meaningful public process,” McEachern wrote. “By shifting costs retroactively and disproportionately onto taxpayers rather than sharing them prospectively and transparently through rate-setting, this approach undermines confidence in the public risk pool model.”

He told Scanlan the implications “extend well beyond Portsmouth.”

“Municipalities and school districts across New Hampshire depend on the stability and predictability of public risk pools in order to responsibly plan their budgets and manage taxpayer dollars,” he said. “When large retroactive assessments are imposed without clear authority or process, it creates uncertainty not only for local governments but for taxpayers across the state who ultimately bear the cost.”

McCourt sent out a statement from the city’s Legal Department on March 13.

It stated city officials on March 13 “affirmed that health insurance coverage for Portsmouth School Department staff remains in place and uninterrupted, while the city continues to seek a reasonable and lawful resolution of an unprecedented and disputed, mid-year assessment imposed by” SchoolCare.

In the release McCourt reported the “city has proposed multiple paths toward resolution, each of which SchoolCare has declined.”

McCourt added the city “will provide a public update to the City Council and School Board at the March 16, 2026 City Council meeting, following an anticipated public presentation” by the Secretary of State.

The city’s “school side employees,” have been members of SchoolCare, a risk pool that administers health insurance, “since about 2012,” he said previously.

The city has agreed to pay for SchoolCare coverage next fiscal year, even though rates are projected to increase by 26%, McCourt told the City Council previously.

“I’ve also found as of June 30 of 2023, SchoolCare had a reserve in the amount of $29.5 million, which was then paid down and extinguished and exhausted over a period of three years,” McCourt said. “This assessment again is designed to refill a portion of that reserve, with the remainder apparently to be recovered through rate setting, through the ordinary course.”

SchoolCare leader seeks agreement

Lisa Duquette, the executive director at SchoolCare, previously said she’s “absolutely” hopeful the city and SchoolCare can reach an agreement.

“We have 98% of our membership who either paid in full, or have entered into agreements to pay in full by July 15,” she said.

Commentary: Setting record straight on Portsmouth healthcare coverage: SchoolCare

Monday’s council meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m. and will be held in City Council chambers.