The root of this whole situation is that I asked a direct question concerning where the appraised value of my home came in and the chances of the loan being denied. What I was told gave me confidence that the loan was all but a done deal, but when the appraisal came in the loan was denied. Now they will not refund my appraisal fee. I would not have gone through with this had the loan officer given a truthful answer, but I was made to believe that all was ok and there would not be any issues.
As with every other complaint that I have read it all started out ok. Christine was very nice, only slightly pushy. But I "must" give them my credit card info so I can "lock" in my interest rate. I understood that once I gave them my credit card info a refund would be next to impossible to get. I was worried about my appraised value coming in low, being denied the loan and then losing the deposit. Before I gave in and moved forward with this I called and asked if my appraisal came in low would I still qualify for the loan. What I was told was "yes and no. Yes it matters if the holder of your second mortgage refuses to subordinate and we have to combine the 1st and 2nd into a FHA loan and then we have to come it at 80% loan to value. And no because the Making Home Affordable program is designed for homeowners who's homes have recently lost value." That statement has been recorded by Quicken and the client services member Michelle reviewed the tapes and told me that was what was said. She refuses to let me hear the tapes to confirm it myself. But I hardly see how it matters. I was told that the type of loan was meant just for low values. I did not realize I was supposed to grill the loan officer until she gave me the correct answer. I had no way of knowing she gave me the incorrect answer. When I asked the client services member the exact same question her reply was "of course it matters" How do two people at the same company come up with two completely different answers for the same question? Somebody is either withholding pertinent information, uniformed, or simply lying.
I asked Michelle why Christine didn't tell me what value my home had to come in at for the loan to go through. I also asked why I wasn't informed of the the "loan to value" required for the loan. I was basically told that those are questions I should have asked the loan officer at the time. So, I didn't ask the right questions. My problem is that I did ask. I didn't phrase it exactly like that but the question was asked. It is the loan providers responsibility to provide information to the client so they can make an informed decision. Given the question that I asked and the answer that I was given I assumed I was making an informed decision. Obviously this was not the case, one can not make an informed decision if the information they receive is false. These figures were not disclosed in the beginning. I was only made aware of these figures after the third phone call with client services arguing over the deposit.
Their argument is that the contract was signed, therefore I have no recourse. It doesn't matter what was said or what was implied, the contract was signed. Even though the contract was signed under false information on their part. I am still out of my money. Now, if I was to provide false information on the application I would be held accountable, but apparently they are immune from such basics of good business.
Basically they can tell you whatever they want to get you to sign the contract then they have you by the balls and there is nothing whatsoever that you can do about it. I have dealt with them one on one, I have gone through the BBB, but there is nothing I can do. So I will just keep on posting complaints and hopefully I can prevent someone else from being ripped off.
0 comments