Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Litigation and Contingent Liabilities	Litigation and Other Legal Matters In the normal course of business and as a result of the consumer-oriented nature of the industry in which we operate, we and other industry participants are frequently subject to various consumer claims, litigation and regulatory investigations seeking damages, fines and statutory penalties. The claims allege, among other theories of liability, violations of state, federal and foreign truth-in-lending, credit availability, credit reporting, consumer protection, warranty, debt collection, insurance and other consumer-oriented laws and regulations, including claims seeking damages for physical and mental damages relating to the repossession and sale of consumers' vehicles and other debt collection activities. As the assignee of Consumer Loans originated by Dealers, we may also be named as a co-defendant in lawsuits filed by consumers principally against Dealers. We may also have disputes and litigation with Dealers. The claims may allege, among other theories of liability, that we breached our Dealer servicing agreement. The damages, fines and penalties that may be claimed by consumers, regulatory agencies or Dealers in these types of matters can be substantial. The relief requested by plaintiffs varies but may include requests for compensatory, statutory and punitive damages and injunctive relief, and plaintiffs may seek treatment as purported class actions. An adverse ultimate disposition in any action to which we are a party or otherwise subject could have a material adverse impact on our financial position, liquidity and results of operations. The following matters include current actions to which we are a party and updates to matters that were disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016. On August 14, 2017, we received a subpoena from the Attorney General of the State of Mississippi, relating to the origination and collection of non-prime auto loans in the state of Mississippi. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation. On June 14, 2017, we were informed that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity is investigating whether the Company may have violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this inquiry. On November 7, 2016, we received a civil investigative demand from the Federal Trade Commission seeking information on the Company’s policies, practices and procedures in allowing car dealers to use GPS Starter Interrupters on consumer vehicles. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation. On March 18, 2016, we received a subpoena from the Attorney General of the State of Maryland, relating to the Company’s repossession and sale policies and procedures in the state of Maryland. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation. On February 19, 2016, we received a First Amended Complaint filed by Westlake Services d/b/a Westlake Financial Service and Nowcom Corporation, alleging that the Company has attempted to monopolize the indirect financing profit sharing program market in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act and seeking, among other things, injunctive relief and unspecified money damages, which, if awarded, would likely be trebled pursuant to the Sherman Act. The case was filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, Western Division. On April 6, 2016, the Court dismissed the claims brought by Nowcom Corporation. We cannot predict the duration or outcome of this lawsuit at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this lawsuit. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter. On September 18, 2015, we received a subpoena from the Attorney General of the State of New York, Civil Rights Bureau relating to the Company’s origination and collection of Consumer Loans in the state of New York. We have cooperated with the inquiry, but cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation. On December 9, 2014, we received a civil investigative subpoena from the U.S. Department of Justice pursuant to the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 directing us to produce certain information relating to subprime automotive finance and related securitization activities. We have cooperated with the inquiry, but cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation. On December 4, 2014, we received a civil investigative demand from the Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts relating to the origination and collection of non-prime auto loans in Massachusetts. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation.

Litigation and Other Legal Matters

In the normal course of business and as a result of the consumer-oriented nature of the industry in which we operate, we and other industry participants are frequently subject to various consumer claims, litigation and regulatory investigations seeking damages, fines and statutory penalties. The claims allege, among other theories of liability, violations of state, federal and foreign truth-in-lending, credit availability, credit reporting, consumer protection, warranty, debt collection, insurance and other consumer-oriented laws and regulations, including claims seeking damages for physical and mental damages relating to the repossession and sale of consumers' vehicles and other debt collection activities. As the assignee of Consumer Loans originated by Dealers, we may also be named as a co-defendant in lawsuits filed by consumers principally against Dealers. We may also have disputes and litigation with Dealers. The claims may allege, among other theories of liability, that we breached our Dealer servicing agreement. The damages, fines and penalties that may be claimed by consumers, regulatory agencies or Dealers in these types of matters can be substantial. The relief requested by plaintiffs varies but may include requests for compensatory, statutory and punitive damages and injunctive relief, and plaintiffs may seek treatment as purported class actions. An adverse ultimate disposition in any action to which we are a party or otherwise subject could have a material adverse impact on our financial position, liquidity and results of operations. The following matters include current actions to which we are a party and updates to matters that were disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.

On August 14, 2017, we received a subpoena from the Attorney General of the State of Mississippi, relating to the origination and collection of non-prime auto loans in the state of Mississippi. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation.

On June 14, 2017, we were informed that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity is investigating whether the Company may have violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this inquiry.

On November 7, 2016, we received a civil investigative demand from the Federal Trade Commission seeking information on the Company’s policies, practices and procedures in allowing car dealers to use GPS Starter Interrupters on consumer vehicles. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation.

On March 18, 2016, we received a subpoena from the Attorney General of the State of Maryland, relating to the Company’s repossession and sale policies and procedures in the state of Maryland. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation.

On February 19, 2016, we received a First Amended Complaint filed by Westlake Services d/b/a Westlake Financial Service and Nowcom Corporation, alleging that the Company has attempted to monopolize the indirect financing profit sharing program market in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act and seeking, among other things, injunctive relief and unspecified money damages, which, if awarded, would likely be trebled pursuant to the Sherman Act. The case was filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, Western Division. On April 6, 2016, the Court dismissed the claims brought by Nowcom Corporation. We cannot predict the duration or outcome of this lawsuit at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this lawsuit. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter.

On September 18, 2015, we received a subpoena from the Attorney General of the State of New York, Civil Rights Bureau relating to the Company’s origination and collection of Consumer Loans in the state of New York. We have cooperated with the inquiry, but cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation.

On December 9, 2014, we received a civil investigative subpoena from the U.S. Department of Justice pursuant to the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 directing us to produce certain information relating to subprime automotive finance and related securitization activities. We have cooperated with the inquiry, but cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation.

On December 4, 2014, we received a civil investigative demand from the Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts relating to the origination and collection of non-prime auto loans in Massachusetts. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation.