DSC transferred vehicles from Dial Finance account to Grissom's credit line without Grissom's knowledge or consent. Now DSC wants Grissom to pay for Dial Finance's vehicles, because Dial was duplicated titles to DSC, and AFC. Shame on you DSC. you never paid the source on behalf of Grissom is that fraud you are committing against Grissom? see utube Grissomize.

Is this why J. Wick said that DSC decided not to get a lender's license?

In order to bar defense of usury, illegal provisions in instrument must have been knowingly and fraudulently inserted by borrower, without knowledge of lender, for purpose of enabling borrower to thereafter defeat recovery on the instrument. Martin v. Ajax Const. Co. (App. 1 Dist. 1954) 124 Cal.App.2d 425, 269 P.2d 132.

Dealer Services Corporation corporate counsel John Wick admitted that he wrote the contract and made the decision not to obtain a Lenders License pursuant to California Finance Lenders Law (CFLL). It was Defendant’s duty to know the laws, rules and regulations governing its business (10 Cal. Code of Regs. § 1446) as a finance lender before they made loans to Defendant, not after. DSC applied for a California Finance Lenders License on April 1, 2008, shortly after Grissom exposed their lack of licensure.