Golden Empire Mortgage, Inc.

This complaint arises from a real estate transaction by which the Consumer was purchasing residential property located in the City of Compton (the “Compton Property”)The Consumer financed that purchase using an FHA-insured mortgage loan provided by Golden Empire Mortgage, Inc(“GEM”) acting as the lender
The purchase and sale agreement that the Consumer entered into with the seller of the Compton Property made clear that the Consumer was purchasing the property “as is.” The purchase and sale agreement also afforded the Consumer a defined period of time after the agreement was signed to inspect the Compton Property and either approve its condition, demand that the seller make repairs, or cancel the transactionConsistent with the purchase and sale agreement, the Consumer hired a home inspection company who inspected the Compton Property shortly after escrow was opened and issued a 60-page Home Inspection Report detailing it findings concerning the condition of the Compton PropertyAlthough the Consumer acknowledges receiving this Home Inspection Report, the Consumer never reviewed it and proceeded with the purchase and sale transactionGEM was not provided with a copy of this Home Inspection Report
Five days before escrow closed, the agent for the seller arranged for an inspection of the Compton Property by the Compton Department of Building and SafetyThe Municipal Code for City of Compton imposes a requirement on all sellers of residential real property located within the City’s boundaries to obtain a report from the City of Compton Building and Safety Department identifying any Building Code violations before entering into a sales agreement with any purchaserThe Compton Municipal Code also requires that the seller deliver a copy of the report to the buyer before entering into any escrow agreement or transferring title to the residential real property
On September 6, 2017, the City of Compton inspected the Compton Property and issued a Pre-Sale Inspection Correction List to the Consumer’s real estate agentThat Pre-Sale Inspection Correction List identified a number of code violations that the City of Compton expected to be correctedOn September 11, 2017, after the Consumer had closed escrow on the Compton Property, the Consumer’s real estate agent delivered a copy of the Pre-Sale Inspection Correction List to the ConsumerAt the time this Pre-Sale Inspection Correction List was delivered, the Consumer signed an acknowledgment confirming that she was purchasing the Compton Property “as is” and would assume responsibility for correcting the identified deficienciesGEM was not provided with a copy of this Pre-Sale Inspection Correction List before approving and funding Consumer’s loan
Consumer’s position is that GEM, as the mere lender that provided financing to her in order to facilitate her purchase of the Compton Property, is somehow responsible for curing the deficiencies noted in the Pre-Sale Inspection Correction List issued by the Compton Department of Building and SafetyGEM denies that is responsible in any way for failures of the seller, the Consumer’s real estate agent, or the Consumer’s decision to proceed with the purchase transaction on an “as is” basisThis notwithstanding, GEM is attempting to work with the Consumer to find an acceptable resolution to the issues raised by the City of Compton Department of Building and Safety in order to insure that its collateral position is not jeopardized
Despite the fact that it has no obligation to do so, GEM is making a good faith effort to work with the Consumer to resolve her unhappinessBut every rebuttle by the Consumer to a response by GEM does not require or justify a surrebuttle, and GEM is not going to engage in a continual back-and-forth with the Consumer through the Revdex.com Consumer complaint portalGEM’s response to the Consumer and the Revdex.com is as stated aboveGEM will not be responding to the Revdex.com about this complaint further

To Whom It May Concern
Loan Account Number: 2***
I wish to raise an official complaint with Golden Empire Mortgage regarding their handling of our mortgage account on the basis that we have been misled about our loan origination fees by loan officer Cam *** (NMLS ID #: 310344)
While we were shopping for homes, Mr*** approved our financing and would periodically send us rates and closing estimatesIn all those forms, there was $in origination feesWhen we closed escrow on our home (for Via Viento Ln, Corona, CA 92882) on Jan19, 2017, there was, to our surprise, an origination fee of $3,was included in our closing costMr*** assured us verbally and in writing that GEMCorp would issue us a lender credit for that amount, and it would be issued to us within 5-days of closing escrow
It has been FOUR months since we have closed escrow, and we still do not have our $3,We demand to know why we have not received our money and when we will rec

On September 11, I purchased a home and was manipulated by a loan officer by the *** *** an employee of GEM Mortgage division Golden Empire IncMr*** and his friend Jose Sanchez my realtor at the time I purchased the home conspired with one another and robbed me of the equity on my home I was overcharged for many fees and Mr*** approved an FHA loan of a home that has over $20,in repairs Mr*** and the selling agent Jose Sanchez from Supreme Investments are defrauding customers getting homes approved through FHA loans that don't meet the FHA standards

Ms***- Golden Empire Mortgage, Inc(“GEM”) is in receipt of your “Second Notice” regarding the complaint filed with the Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”) by *** *** (Complaint ID ***)The Second Notice, like the initial notice, requested a response by GEM to this complaint within
ten (10) calendar days after receipt.GEM is in communication with the consumer regarding this matter and is investigating the transaction from which the complaint arises, but the matter the complicated and involves a number of moving parts and partiesAs a consequence, a substantive response to either Ms*** or to the Revdex.com within the arbitrary ten (10) day time period afforded is neither realistic or reasonable in this particular instance.I have informed Ms*** that a substantive response to her response would take some time given the complexity of the matterThe purpose of this communication is to provide the Revdex.com with that same noticeGEM will work diligently to complete its investigation in a reasonable timeframe at which stage it will respond to both Ms*** and the Revdex.comIn the meantime, I presume that such an approach meets with your satisfaction, but if that is not the case for whatever reason, feel free to reach out to me to discuss the matter further.*** M***Executive Vice President, Legal and ComplianceGolden Empire Mortgage, Inc

Dear MsCarmona, Re: Customer Complaint ID: Customer Name: *** ***
Golden Empire Mortgage, Inc(“GEM”) is in receipt of the Second Notice of the customer complaint submitted to the Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”) by *** *** as referenced above by your Customer Complaint ID #. Please note that we never received the first notice from your department regarding the complaint received by the Revdex.comHowever, our corporate office did receive the letter dated Sunday, April 30th, 2017, today and immediately forwarded to our department. I am responding to advise you that Golden Empire Mortgage has responded to the borrower and our response was clear and specific as to our decision regarding the determination and refund paid to her. I have attached a copy of the response, the check issued and all the disclosures provided to the borrower which supports our decision and determinationI trust that the response adequately addresses the concerns the borrower raised. If this is not the case, or if you have any further questions or comments regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me I would appreciate an acknowledgement that you did receive this response to you as the letter received indicated to respond to the e-mail indicated in the letter, which is you Professional Regards, *** ***, Assistant Compliance Officer

I am rejecting this response because: I too, do not want to keep going back and forth any further. However, for the record according to Mr. [redacted] Escrow Closed on 9/11/2017 in the morning. However, I signed for the property "AS IS" at 9:00pm and the Notary for one the final documents was that crook at Supreme Investments inc,.  With that being said, Mr. [redacted] is right the selling agent at Supreme Investments Corp., withheld "crucial" documentation that would have affected the sale of the home. However, on 9/12/2017 a representative of Golden Empire Inc, was contacted and made aware that a "potential crime of fraud had been committed" by the selling agent at Supreme Investment corp. and instead of pulling loan the agent at Golden Empire Inc. made empty promises (e.g. we are going to help you) because that was his friend at Supreme Investment Corp. all the while knowing that he (Golden Empire Inc,) would do no such thing, sad. I'm writing a letter next to the FTC and AG  I will never rest and will forward copies of complaints to various media outlets post on twitter, youtube and Facebook until someone hears my pleas for help. I wouldn't be surprise if these two companies engaged in this kind fraudulent and/or deceptive behavior with other consumers.  I would love for this ugly situation to be to be over, resolved and I don't know what else to do.

I am rejecting this response because they did not address the negligence of their loan officer in providing fiduciary guidance. Also, they did not refund us the correct amount. Here is the letter we sent as a response: 
May 10, 2017To GEM CORP[redacted] Assistant Compliance OfficerWe are writing today in response to the investigation and subsequent action by GEM, in response to the complaint regarding Loan no. 2051610088  filed by Adam Lovinus and [redacted] (the BORROWERS) against [redacted] a mortgage officer representing GEM that the BORROWERS engaged to finance the purchase of a residential property located at 1[redacted]e, Corona California.The BORROWERS find the response by GEM, as articulated in correspondence dated April 17, 2017 and prepared by [redacted], does not address the negligence and ethical misconduct on the part of mortgage officer and fails to appropriately correct the situation.Mr. [redacted] neglected to provide the necessary fiduciary duties owed to the principal borrower under California Business and Professions Code Section 10176. Specifically: (a) making any substantial misrepresentation about the terms of the loan. The promise of refunding origination fees as shown on each disclosure was used to influence or steer the lender into accepting the loan terms, with verbal assurances that a refund was forthcoming. This is a violation of Truth In Lending Act Section 226.36. Without these assurances, we could have shopped around for a different lender and would not have accepted the terms set forth on paper by Mr. [redacted].Moreover, it is unacceptable that GEM calculated the difference between origination fees listed in the Jan.11, 2017, disclosure, against those listed in the Jan 23, 2017, disclosure, to characterize it as a “refund” to the BORROWERS. First, those “refunds” were never explicitly itemized or explained by Mr. [redacted] during the financing process to the BORROWERS, and was never understood by the BORROWERS to be as such. Neither were they itemized in the disclosures provided by Mr. [redacted] to the BORROWERS.  The $1,024 listed as lender’s credit in the Jan. 23 document was not in the same documents that we signed in front of the notary on Jan. 19. Without an itemized explanation from Mr. [redacted], that does not amount to the credit promised to us by Mr. [redacted]. If GEM assumes that the aforementioned fees difference (or “reduced loan origination fee”) constitutes a refund to the BORROWERS, it furthers the extent of fiduciary negligence on the part of Mr. [redacted]. The BORROWERS are requesting that GEM refund the entire sum listed in the final disclosure, as Mr. [redacted] promised, repeatedly in writing and in phone conversations, before the BORROWERS finalized the financing with GEM, and in follow-up conversations following the signing of the final disclosure.In addition to the lender credit listed on the final disclosure, and the refund check mailed with the April 17, 2017, correspondence, the BORROWERS request that the remaining $2,048 be refunded immediately. We also would like a written apology from Mr. [redacted] and GEMCORP regarding the neglect in explaining to the BORROWERS all the terms of our mortgage and the delay in providing our refund. It is important to the BORROWERS that this kind of neglect doesn’t affect anybody else.Your timely response to this matter is greatly appreciated.Sincerely,Adam Lovinus and [redacted]Corona CA 92882CC: Camron [redacted]Revdex.com SacramentoPresident, GEM CORP