Sign in

Guidance Residential

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Guidance Residential? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Loans, Consumer Finance Companies Guidance Residential

Guidance Residential Reviews (51)

*** *** ** *** ***
*** *Bloomfield NJ *** MESSAGE FROM BUSINESS:Hello,Please see the attached letter to the customer as a response to this claim We trust that this will resolve the issue Please do not hesitate to contact us further should we still need to resolve something else in this complaintTo: Accounting DepartmentDate: 7/30/2015Please issue a check in the sum of $ $425.00In favor of Company Name: *** *** Address: ** *** *** *** *Bloomfield, NJ ***Deliver To: *** *** When:Particulars (Explain Fully) AmountResolve consumer complaint re: GR *** & *** Appraisal Fee Refund $425.00Total $425.00Requested by: Approved Date Bill M*** See E-Mail 7/30/2015Best regards,Heidi P***Guidance Residential, LLC

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: the business did not admit their incompetency in looking at the ut austin contract which stated clearly that the employment is starting sep 1st and the closing to be july 18thThis is more than required month period of paystub to be provided after closing Which is required by their policyThat lack of communication dears, cost us thousands of dollars in lossesWe presented you with several contracts and you failed to verify them just because they r not enrolled in the payroll yetHow about u pick up the phone today and call both of our employers!! It was not enough for Guidance to put a condtion of 10k in held escrow to prove they r "money" not faith based bank but still just to delay the closing to harm us financiallySo to my dear brothers and sisters AVOID guidance if possible and seek an alternative Islamic Financial Bank Thank youBest Regards***
Regards,
*** ***

November 4, 2014
Dear [redacted]:In response to your October 29, 2014 correspondence, I have reviewed [redacted]n’s complaint. I do not believe that **. [redacted]’s complaint has any merit. As I understand the complaint, the allegations are that the terms of his mortgage were not...

consistent with the disclosure at the time of application, and further we are inconsistent in the calculation of the monthly profit (interest) payment.On the date of the application, January 6, 2014 the appropriate disclosures, including the Truth in Lending Disclosure (TIL) and our program disclosure titled “Use of a Bankruptcy-Remote Limited Liability Company as Co-Owner and LLC Maintenance Fee (“LLC Fee”)” were electronically submitted to [redacted] and [redacted]. The TIL disclosure disclosed a principal and interest payment of $770.12 for a term of 15 years. The LLC Fee disclosure explains the use of and monthly maintenance fee of $18.75 for the use of an LLC as co-owner related to our unique mortgage product. [redacted]n acknowledged receipt of these documents on January 8, 2014 and indicated his intent to proceed with the transaction. (See attachment designated as Early Disclosures)
The mortgage transaction closed on February 6, 2014. The final TIL disclosure signed by the [redacted]ns is consistent with the early TIL terms, a 15 year term with a monthly payment of $770.12. The [redacted]s also signed the LLC Fee disclosure agreeing to the maintenance fee of $18.75 per month. The [redacted]s were also provided with a “Schedule to Co-Ownership Agreement” which clearly outlines that amortization of their payments over the 15 year term. (See attachment designated as Final Documents)We believe that our response should bring closure to this complaintRegards,Bill M

September 28,2015Dear [redacted]:I have received your complaint, have interviewed Mr. Nabil E**, and have reviewed the disclosure documentation provided with your application and mortgage. I find that the early disclosures are consistent with the final charges at settlement.On July 6,2015 at the...

time of your pre-qualification, you were provided with an estimate of settlement charges that showed charges totaling $1,394.00 for Underwriting, Application, Processing, and Administrative Fees as well as an additional charge of $425.00 for an Appraisal Fee, (copy attached)On July 10, 2015 at the time of your application, you were provided with a Good Faith Estimate (GFE) indicating your origination charges would be a total of $1,394.00 (copy attached)On July 10, 2015 at the time of your application,you were provided with a second estimate of settlement charges that showed charges totaling $1,394.00 for Underwriting, Application, Processing, and Administrative Fees as for an Appraisal Fee, well as an additional charge of $425.00 (copy attached)On September 1, 2015 at the time of settlement, you were provided with a Settlement Statement (HUD-1) outlining fees consistent with the prior disclosures; an Underwriting Fee of $340.00 a Processing Fee of $390.00, an Administrative Fee of $565.00, of $99.00; at total of $1,394.00. This statement also shows that you paid and an Application $425.00 outside of Fee the closing for an Appraisal Fee. (copy attached)On page one of the Settlement Statement (HUD-1) line number 204 shows that the application fee of $99.00 was refunded as agreed upon the successful completion of your transaction. On page two line number 804 shows that you were given a credit of $10.00, the difference between the Appraisal Fee that you paid after authorizing your intent to proceed after application and the actual cost of the appraisal by Evaluation Zone in the amount of $415.00.Also, on page one of the Settlement Statement (HUD-1); line 205 shows that you were given an additional credit of $195.00 for timely submission of your underwriting paperwork.It appears that you may have mistaken the agreement to refund the Application Fee upon successful processing of your application with a refund of the Appraisal Fee. lt also appears that at no time did we disclose any less than $1,394.00 in origination fees.We are sorry for any confusion and trust that our explanation and the enclosed documentation help to clarify the details of your transaction.Regards,William M. Senior Vice President

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Each statement in your response is a lie.  Mr. E** never, ever, not once, requested an employment letter.  I advised him that I may work remotely.  These conversations all occurred via email and I have all the records.  He then advised me to send all of my financial documentation, which I did.  He then disappeared.  Can you tell me why he wanted my bank statements, employment records, and social security number if he intended to use it and disappear? I advise you to inquire as to why your employee, Mr. E**, feels the need to tell bold faced and blatant lies.  I also question why you defend a business practice of ignoring client calls, no matter your perceptions.  Your Revdex.com status should be revoked and you need to stop labeling yourself as Islamic.  After repeated inquiries, I received this email from Mr. E** on July 17th:
"Eid M[redacted],
yes, I'm working on your file. the corporate will email you the disclosures on Tue inshá Allah."
After I did not hear back from him, I was assigned a new case manager, Nejat, who told me Mr. E** was "busy, I don't know what happened to him" so she was assigned my file.  This was after repeated complaints to Mr. N[redacted].  Can you tell me where in that conversation anything regarding an employer letter came up?  I told both Mr. Eid and Ms. A[redacted] that I would provide whatever documentation was necessary, including any letters from my employer.  Further, I was putting down 20%, whether the conversation was about a primary residence or an investment property.  Check my application. Ms. A[redacted] told me "don't worry, we will make it work either way" and "you need to connect your utilities within a week to show that it's your residence."  Your continued incompetence is a testament to the sham of a company that you are.  I refuse to accept the continued lies that you make about my file and you need to be held accountable.  The complaint has also been lodged with the Federal Trade Commission.
Ms. A[redacted] and I had one conversation, after I had to chase her down.  I am happy to provide the audio of that call.  Either invest in better employees or stop covering up for the lies that they tell.
Regards,[redacted]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com: Please also issue refund on application fee $99.00 which I paid twice as per [redacted] I suppose to get refund at closing since there will be no closing so please issue refund for that thanks.
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Each statement in your response is a lie.  Mr. E** never, ever, not once, requested an employment letter.  I advised him that I may work remotely.  These conversations all occurred via email and I have all the records.  He then advised me to send all of my financial documentation, which I did.  He then disappeared.  Can you tell me why he wanted my bank statements, employment records, and social security number if he intended to use it and disappear? I advise you to inquire as to why your employee, Mr. E**, feels the need to tell bold faced and blatant lies.  I also question why you defend a business practice of ignoring client calls, no matter your perceptions.  Your Revdex.com status should be revoked and you need to stop labeling yourself as Islamic.  After repeated inquiries, I received this email from Mr. E** on July 17th:"Eid M[redacted],yes, I'm working on your file. the corporate will email you the disclosures on Tue inshá Allah."After I did not hear back from him, I was assigned a new case manager, Nejat, who told me Mr. E** was "busy, I don't know what happened to him" so she was assigned my file.  This was after repeated complaints to Mr. N[redacted].  Can you tell me where in that conversation anything regarding an employer letter came up?  I told both Mr. Eid and Ms. A[redacted] that I would provide whatever documentation was necessary, including any letters from my employer.  Further, I was putting down 20%, whether the conversation was about a primary residence or an investment property.  Check my application. Ms. A[redacted] told me "don't worry, we will make it work either way" and "you need to connect your utilities within a week to show that it's your residence."  Your continued incompetence is a testament to the sham of a company that you are.  I refuse to accept the continued lies that you make about my file and you need to be held accountable.  The complaint has also been lodged with the Federal Trade Commission.Ms. A[redacted] and I had one conversation, after I had to chase her down.  I am happy to provide the audio of that call.  Either invest in better employees or stop covering up for the lies that they tell.Regards,[redacted]

This company present themselves as Islamic company that follow shria law. Their action is anything but Islamic. They lie, cheat and have no respect to people's time, money or effort. They call interest rate a profit rate and all their fees are more expensive than any bank I know.
They sell your loan as soon as they sell it to you and work with Interest based banks, check their website yourself. I would stay away from them.

Hello,We have researched this complaint and have responded to the customer with an e-mail and a refund of both the application fee and appraisal fee per the attached copy of the e-mail to the customer.  We trust that this matter is now resolved.Best regards,Heidi P[redacted]Guidance...

Residential, LLC

RE: Complaint #[redacted]Complainant: [redacted] - Guidance Residential Contract No. [redacted]Dear [redacted]:In response to your correspondence received October 11, 2016, have reviewed [redacted]'s Complaint. The Complaint Concerns fees charged in advance of closing, processing time for her application, the...

property value listed in the Completed appraisal report and the change in rate and points due to the appraisa report property value.[redacted] Submitted an application for financing with Guidance Residential, LLC ("Guidance") on August 17, 2016. On August 18, 2016, we sent an initial disclosure package to her with information about the transaction including the fees, processing time and requirements, [redacted] signed and returned the document package to us on August 18, 2016. As part of the package, Ms. [redacted] provided a signed intention to Proceed with Transaction document confirming that based on the information provided in the package she wanted to proceed with the processing of her application,In the complaint, [redacted] states she had never paid a lock fee, appraisal fee or condominium questionnaire fee prior to closing in previous transactions with other financiers. The timing of the payment of these types of fees is not uniform across the industry and there is no regulatory provision requiring these fees to be paid at closing. Guidance is not unique in requiring these fees to be paid prior to closing. The initial disclosure package provided to the customer at the time of application provided information about these fees. After receiving the document package, Ms. [redacted] provided her written intent to proceed with the transaction.Regarding the profit rate lock fee and the time to process the application, Guidance provided an informational document about locking the profit rate in the initial disclosure package. This document informs the customer that the average processing time for a transaction is 45 business days. This document further explains that Guidance does not charge a fee to lock the profit rate unless the customer opts to lock the profit rate prior to approval of the transaction ("early lock"). There is a $500 fee to early lock that is refunded to the customer at closing. Customers often choose this option to reserve a low rate that may not be available later in the processing of the transaction. On August 24, 2016, Ms. [redacted] opted to early lock her transaction with a 45 day lock period and pay the $500 fee. Considering this lock periodchosen, the transaction needed to close on or about October 8, 2016.Regarding the profit rate lock and the appraisal, **. [redacted] submitted her application advising an estimated property value of $540,000. Because the transaction was early locked and the appraisal report had not yet been completed, the estimated value stated by the customer was used to lock the rate. Following the [redacted]'s payment of the appraisal fee on August 24, 2016, the appraisal was ordered from an independent appraiser through an appraisal management Company ("AMC"). The lock agreement provided to the customer on August 25, 2016 states that if any of the terms or characteristics of the transaction change, then the terms of the lock agreement could change as well. On October 4, 2016, the Completed appraisal report was reviewed by our underwriting department. Because the report listed an appraised value of $499,000, a decrease in the value of $41,000 Compared to the estimated value reported by the customer, the loan-to-value percent ("TV") of the transaction increased, changing the characteristics of the transaction. This lower property value increased the LTV to 80.65, Because the LTV was now over 80 percent, mortgage insurance needed to be added to the transaction pursuant to federal and investor requirements. The rate and points needed to be reworked due to the increased LTV and to accommodate the cost of the mortgage insurance. On October 6, 2016, our account executive reached out to the customer with options for reworking the rate and points that included lender credits to reduce the impact of the increased points. The account executive also advised that we were contacting the appraisal management company to have a secondary review to assure there were no errors in the report including the comparable sales used to determine the value. On October 6, 2016, the customer emailed the account executive rejecting the possible options and requesting the transaction be canceled and the lock deposit refunded.Additionally, [redacted] stated in her complaint that the house next door to her sold for $534,000 which she felt should have caused her house to appraise at a greater value. She also implied the appraiser worked for Guidance. The property referenced by **. [redacted] sold AFTER the appraisal report was completed and provided to Guidance so it was not considered as a comparable sale to determine the value in the report. [redacted] cancelled the transaction before we could have a secondary review by the AMC. The AMC Selects the appraiser who visits the property and completes the report. All selected appraisers are vetted by the AMC to make sure there is no relationship with Guidance.While the lower property value that caused the change in rate and points was not within the Control of Guidance, we do understand that the reduced value did significantly affect the transaction and the Customer's willingness to move forward. As a result, for customer service reasons, we will refund the customer's early lock fee as she originally requested. A check for the $500 early lock fee will be mailed to the customer within five (5) business days of this letter.We believe our response should bring closure to this complaint.Susan P

November 4, 2014Dear [redacted]:In response to your October 29, 2014 correspondence, I have reviewed [redacted]n’s complaint. I do not believe that **. [redacted]’s complaint has any merit. As I understand the complaint, the allegations are that the terms of his mortgage were not consistent with...

the disclosure at the time of application, and further we are inconsistent in the calculation of the monthly profit (interest) payment.On the date of the application, January 6, 2014 the appropriate disclosures, including the Truth in Lending Disclosure (TIL) and our program disclosure titled “Use of a Bankruptcy-Remote Limited Liability Company as Co-Owner and LLC Maintenance Fee (“LLC Fee”)” were electronically submitted to [redacted] and [redacted]. The TIL disclosure disclosed a principal and interest payment of $770.12 for a term of 15 years. The LLC Fee disclosure explains the use of and monthly maintenance fee of $18.75 for the use of an LLC as co-owner related to our unique mortgage product. [redacted]n acknowledged receipt of these documents on January 8, 2014 and indicated his intent to proceed with the transaction. (See attachment designated as Early Disclosures)The mortgage transaction closed on February 6, 2014. The final TIL disclosure signed by the [redacted]ns is consistent with the early TIL terms, a 15 year term with a monthly payment of $770.12. The [redacted]s also signed the LLC Fee disclosure agreeing to the maintenance fee of $18.75 per month. The [redacted]s were also provided with a “Schedule to Co-Ownership Agreement” which clearly outlines that amortization of their payments over the 15 year term. (See attachment designated as Final Documents)We believe that our response should bring closure to this complaintRegards,Bill M

October 16, 2015Dear [redacted];Thank you for taking the time today to discuss your complaint. First of all, let me apologize for any inconvenience and your frustration regarding the fees charged in relation to your recent home purchase and your mortgage with Guidance Residential. I want to assure you that I accept your explanation and will take the appropriate steps to ensure your complaint is voiced to our Human Resources Department and appropriate members of our Executive Management Committee. Second, I will have our Accounting Department prepare a check in the amount of $395.00 to resolve the misstatement of fees and to bring closure to this matter.We at Guidance Residential appreciate your business and hope that we can assist you again in the future.Best regards, BillBill M.Sr. Vice President

September 28,2015
Dear [redacted]:I have received your complaint, have interviewed Mr. Nabil E**, and have reviewed the disclosure documentation provided with your application and mortgage. I find that the early disclosures are consistent with the final charges at settlement.
On...

July 6,2015 at the time of your pre-qualification, you were provided with an estimate of settlement charges that showed charges totaling $1,394.00 for Underwriting, Application, Processing, and Administrative Fees as well as an additional charge of $425.00 for an Appraisal Fee, (copy attached)On July 10, 2015 at the time of your application, you were provided with a Good Faith Estimate (GFE) indicating your origination charges would be a total of $1,394.00 (copy attached)
On July 10, 2015 at the time of your application,you were provided with a second estimate of settlement charges that showed charges totaling $1,394.00 for Underwriting, Application, Processing, and Administrative Fees as for an Appraisal Fee, well as an additional charge of $425.00 (copy attached)
On September 1, 2015 at the time of settlement, you were provided with a Settlement Statement (HUD-1) outlining fees consistent with the prior disclosures; an Underwriting Fee of $340.00 a Processing Fee of $390.00, an Administrative Fee of $565.00, of $99.00; at total of $1,394.00. This statement also shows that you paid and an Application $425.00 outside of Fee the closing for an Appraisal Fee. (copy attached)
On page one of the Settlement Statement (HUD-1) line number 204 shows that the application fee of $99.00 was refunded as agreed upon the successful completion of your transaction. On page two line number 804 shows that you were given a credit of $10.00, the difference between the Appraisal Fee that you paid after authorizing your intent to proceed after application and the actual cost of the appraisal by Evaluation Zone in the amount of $415.00.
Also, on page one of the Settlement Statement (HUD-1); line 205 shows that you were given an additional credit of $195.00 for timely submission of your underwriting paperwork.
It appears that you may have mistaken the agreement to refund the Application Fee upon successful processing of your application with a refund of the Appraisal Fee. lt also appears that at no time did we disclose any less than $1,394.00 in origination fees.We are sorry for any confusion and trust that our explanation and the enclosed documentation help to clarify the details of your transaction.
Regards,
William M. Senior Vice President

RE: Complaint IED [redacted] Our file [redacted]Dear Mr. [redacted]:We are responding to the consumer complaint forwarded to us on September 5, 2016. The complainant previously raised this issue with Guidance Residential staff and received explanations on November 3 and 10, 2016. The complainant is asking...

Guidance Residential to refund the appraisal fee paid of $450 and to reimburse the earnest money he paid to the Seller totaling $2200. We have reviewed the issues raised by the complainant and our response follows.The Complainant contacted us regarding financing to purchase a residential property on or about September 13, 2016. The complainant later provided a residential purchase contract and financing addendum with an effective date of September 21, 2016. The purchase contract stated that approval of financing included both buyer approval and property approval from the lender. Regarding the Contingency date, the contract stated the Buyer could get a refund of earnest money paid by providing written notice to Seller within 21 days after the effective date of the purchase contract.As part of the pre-approval inquiry, the complainant reported verbal financial information. Based on this information and a single bureau credit report, it was determined that the complainant may not be able to qualify on his own. It was suggested that a qualified co-signer may assist the complainant in qualifying. The complainant provided his brother as a co-signer who contacted our Account Executive and verbally provided information. A pre-approval letter was issued on September 27, 2016 based om the information provided by the complainant and co-signer. As stated in the Pre-Approval letter, a full application needed to be submitted along with any requested documentation in order to evaluate and verify the application information and to determine if a commitment to finance could be issued. The complainant submitted an application with a co-signer on September 29, 2016. Initial disclosures, including a required documents list and an intent to proceed document, were sent through a secure website the following day. Per federal law, no further processing of the application could take place until we received the complainant's and the co-signer's intention to proceed with the application. We received the complainant's signed intent to proceed document on October 1, 2016 and the co-signer's on October 5, 2016. Required documentation requested from the complainant and co-signer on September 30, 2016 was received from the complainant aroundOctober 5, 2016. The documentation was reviewed and found to be incomplete Income information for the co-signer was missing and was requested again on October 7, 2016. We received illegible income information for the co-signer on October 18, 2016 and a legible copy on October 20, 2016. The file was immediately sent to our underwriting staff. Until all of the required documentation was received, we could not verify and correctly evaluate the customer's and co-signer's creditworthiness to determine if the financing could be approved. Even though a customer's debt to income ratio may have been high, until full documentation was received and evaluated against our investor's guidelines, a denial of the financing was premature. After verification and evaluation, we found that the complainant could not meet the investor requirements concerning debt-to-income ratio with or without a co-signer. The file was denied on October 31, 2016 with a letter to the complainant on November 3, 2016.At the time we received all of the information needed to verify the application, the period for the complainant to request a return of his earnest money had passed. We received no request from the customer to withdraw his application nor does it appear the complainant requested an extension of the contingency date from the Seller. We moved forward with evaluation but were unfortunately unable to approve the application for financing. Had the income and other documentation been received in a timely manner from the Co-signer, the determination could have been made within the time frame needed for the complainant to receive a refund of the earnest money paid.Regarding the appraisal services, it is our practice and procedure to order the appraisal, with the Consumer's consent, once we receive the consumer's intent to proceed with the transaction. The Complainant provided consent to order the appraisal and paid the upfront appraisal fee. We had no indication from the complainant that he wanted to delay the appraisal order. In fact, both the Complainant and his realtor were asking about the status of the appraisal order as early as October 3,2016.Based on the information above, we will not be reimbursing the Complainant for the earnest money he paid. We processed the complainant's application as expeditiously as possible in light of when the required documentation was received. The complainant did not request to terminate the application due to not having a full approval at the time the contingency period ended nor does it appear he requested an extension of the Contingency date. Although we followed our normal process and procedure concerning the appraisal order, we are willing to refund the appraisal fee paid by the complainant as a good faith gesture. We will be issuing a check for $450 to the complainant and mail to the address listed in the complaint within 5 business days of this letter.We trust our response will bring closure to this complaint,

August 4, 2015Dear [redacted]:I have received your complaint and have reviewed our records. It seems that you had inquired with our offices on several occasions, November 2014, April 2015, June 2015, and finally in July 2015, but have never supplied enough information for a complete application.In...

July 2015 you spoke to our Account Executive, Nejat A[redacted], and provided certain pre-qualification information including verbal authorization for a credit report. After reviewing the pre-qualification information and discussing the nature of your request, Ms. A[redacted] advised that we would be unable to assist you with your request. Our records indicate that she provided you with written confirmation by e-mail.We regret that we will be unable to assist you at this time.Sincerely,Bill M.Senior Vice President

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I didn't see any attached letter with this message so I don't know what's there response to my complain.
Regards,
[redacted]

August 4, 2015
Dear [redacted]:
I have received your complaint and have reviewed our records. It seems that you had inquired with our offices on several occasions, November 2014, April 2015, June 2015, and finally in July 2015, but have never supplied enough information for a...

complete application.In July 2015 you spoke to our Account Executive, Nejat A[redacted], and provided certain pre-qualification information including verbal authorization for a credit report. After reviewing the pre-qualification information and discussing the nature of your request, Ms. A[redacted] advised that we would be unable to assist you with your request. Our records indicate that she provided you with written confirmation by e-mail.
We regret that we will be unable to assist you at this time.
Sincerely,
Bill M.
Senior Vice President

RE: Complaint #[redacted]Complainant: [redacted]-Guidance Residential Contract No. [redacted]Dear Mr. [redacted]:in response to your correspondence received September 29, 2015, f have reviewed Mr. [redacted]'s complaint. Mr. [redacted] has presented information regarding delays in the closing of his application with...

Guidance Residential, LLC ("Guidance") that resulted in late fees from the seller. He is asking for reimbursement of the late fees as well as the cost of his property appraisal. Based on the following explanation, we do not feel that reimbursement is warranted.Mr. [redacted] was the co-applicant on the application submitted to Guidance on June 20, 2016. His wife was the primary applicant. When the application was submitted, the seller of the property indicated that the closing had to occur no later than July 18, 2016 which is significantly shorter than our standard 45 day processing time. We advised the applicants and the seller of our standard processing time and advised that we would do everything possible to close by the July 18" date, which is less than 30 days from the application date.There were several issues that caused the contract not to close on July 18, 2016. The primary issue, however, was our inability to verify the employment information as provided by both applicants. In order for the file to be approved for closing, applicants must be employed on the date of closing with income sufficient to qualify the applicants for the financing. The employment must be verified directly with the employer along with proof of income through paystubs. Employment verifications are generally completed at the beginning of the process and again within 10 days of the closing date. For employers like the University of [redacted], employment is verified through the Human Resources/Personnel Department of the employer.The application signed by the applicants on June 20, 2016 listed a current employer in Massachusetts for the primary applicant and future employment with the University of [redacted] on July 1, 2016. The primary applicant provided a job offer letter from the department chair at the University dated June 8, 2016 showing a start date of September 1, 2016, which conflicted with the information contained in the application. At the beginning of July, the primary applicant then provided two "corrected" job offer letters also dated June 8, 2016 and signed by the same department chair. The first corrected letter listed a start date ofGuidance Residential, LLC[redacted] Road, Suite 200 Reston,VA 2090, USA i.e. ###-###-#### fax ###-###-#### www.Guidance Residential.com July 1, 2016 and the second letter listed a start date of July 15, 2016. Guidance made numerous attempts to clarify the information provided about the terms of the applicant's position. Approval of the application was Conditioned on obtaining a verification of employment confirming the start date and income received from the University of [redacted] position. We attempted to complete a verification of employment with the University of [redacted] Human Resources department on July 15". The University was unable to identify the applicant as an employee based on her social security number. We then Contacted the department where she was to work and was advised that the primary applicant would be Starting Sometime in August. Our Chief Credit Officer had a subsequent conversation with the program director in the department where she was to work and he stated that the applicant started to work on July 15, 2016. We advised the program director we needed to verify that through the University's Human Resource department and suggested that the program director contact the University's Human Resources Department to have discrepancy corrected in their records. We contacted the Human Resources department at least 2 additional times and were advised the primary applicant's start date was September 1, 2016. The primary applicant did not provide us with any paycheck stubs showing income received from the University either during the month of July or August. As part of research to prepare this response, we did an additional verification of employment with the University which Confirms the start date as September 1, 2016. Additionally, there are communications from the primary applicant stating she and the complainant were living in Massachusetts in July and would not be coming to [redacted] until August. As a result, we could not verify the employment and income as presented by the applicant. We Could not close before the September 1 start date using the primary applicant's income to qualify for the financing.We received a request from the primary applicant on July 19, 2016 asking to qualify the application with just the complainant's (co-applicant's) employment and income. We had been advised that the Complainant would remain with the Massachusetts employer until after the transaction closed. We began the process to move forward with the application using only the complainant's employment and income. On August 2, 2016, we were forwarded a letter from the complainant's cousin confirming that Complainant was living with him in Massachusetts. Based on paystubs from the Massachusetts employer provided for the complainant, we were able to qualify based on his income alone and moved forward with processing the application for closing. Subsequently, we also received a job offer letter from a [redacted] employer for the complainant dated July 1, 2016 sent to us by the primary applicant. The letter stated that the complainant would start work on August 15, 2016 with a [redacted] medical office owned by a relative of the applicants. This is the first time we had been advised that the complainant had secured employment in [redacted]. As part of preparation for closing, we contacted the Massachusetts employer for a verification of employment and were advised that the complainant resigned his position as Supervisor on July 27, 2016. In reviewing the employment and income information received from the applicants, we identified a paystub from the medical clinic in [redacted] forwarded to us by the primary applicant. The paystub dated July 22, 2016 from the [redacted] medical clinic listed a [redacted] address for the complainant and reflected a pay period of July 3 through July 16, 2016. This income was prior to the start date in the offer letter from the medical clinic, prior to the applicant's leaving the supervisory position with the Massachusetts employer and during the time complainant was to be living with his cousin in Massachusetts.Based on the discrepancies regarding the Complainant's employment, we could not go forward with the Complainant as the qualifier. We advised that if the applicants wished to go forward with the transaction, we could not close before September 1, 2016 when the primary applicant's [redacted] position was to begin and that we must have paystubs proving employment. The applicants asked us terminate the transaction on August 29, 2016,It is our position that Guidance Residential attempted to process and close the transaction within the time Constraints initially requested by the applicants. Had we been able to verify the employment and income information as presented by the applicants in the application we believe we may have been able to close proximately to the date requested. We are required by our investors as well as by federal law to thoroughly vet and verify any discrepancies in employment and employment income. The delays in closing the transaction were due to conflicting information provided by the applicants and the time needed to get clarification and confirmation of the information provided. We do not believe that Guidance Residential is required to reimburse the applicants for costs incurred for delays caused by investigating the conflicting information they provided.We believe our response should bring closure to this complaint.Very truly yours,Marsaw h Best regards, Heidi P

RE: Revdex.comID#[redacted]; Guidance Residential file #[redacted]Dear [redacted]:In response to your correspondence received February 21, 2017, have reviewed the information from the customer. The complaint concerns the financing application of a new property; whether it could be financed as an investment...

property or an owner-occupied property; listing of the customer's current residence and the appraisal fee charged to the customer.Since filing the complaint, the customer has advised that he wants to continue with the transaction as an investment property. The Customer was fully approved as of March 2, 2017. Anticipated closing date is March 16, 2017.The Customer Contacted us in mid-January 2017 concerning possible financing for a new home, in his Correspondence to us, the customer stated that he was aware of the differences between the down payment requirements for investment and residential properties. On January 25, 2017, the customer filed a full application for an investment property transaction with us. On January 26, 2017, the Customer returned signed disclosures to us including the application and his intent to proceed with the investment transaction. The customer contacted us again on January 27, 2017 stating he wanted to change the financing from investment to residential because "putting all that money on closing costs will not leave us any money to do some of the necessary updates and cleaning of the house that will make it livable." The customer listed his home on the same date as "for sale by owner." The property is still listed as of today's date.After review by our underwriting and risk management departments, it was determined that the transaction could only move forward as an investment transaction. Reasons for this determination include significant reduction in value and square footage between current and proposed properties and the new property was significantly below customer's affordability. Additionally, the customer's son submitted an application for the same property in December 2016 and was denied in January 2017 shortly before the customer contacted Guidance regarding financing for the property. The customer was provided the option of moving forward with the transaction as an investment property or as a residential transaction with the requirement that funds be held in escrow until the customer provided Guidance Residential, LEC| [redacted] Reston, WA [redacted] tel [redacted] fax [redacted] www.guidanceresidential.corn proof of occupancy (i.e. utility bills, address change, driver's license change, etc.). Once the occupancy documentation was provided, the escrow funds would be refunded to the customer. The customer informed us he wanted to move forward as an investment property on February 18, 2017.Regarding the appraisal fee, an appraisal was required regardless of whether the transaction was investment or residential. The appraisal was completed and a copy was provided to the customer on February 6, 2017. As an investment property transaction, the appraisal needed to be upgraded to include required investment property elements. The customer agreed to pay the cost of the appraisal upgrade on February 24, 2017. The upgrades were ordered on an expedited basis with Guidance paying the $150 fee to expedite. A copy of the upgraded appraisal was provided to the customer on March 3,2017.The customer states that he was advised that he had to list his current property in order for the transaction to be treated as a residential financing. We do see in Communications that our account executive suggested that the customer list his home for sale if he wanted to finance as a residential transaction. This is not a requirement for a residential transaction to move forward. We have reviewed the guidelines with our account executive and have addressed the issue with his manager.We do not believe that a refund to the customer of the appraisal fee is warranted based on the above information and the Customer's determination to move forward with the transaction as an investment property. We believe our response should bring closure to this Complaint.Best regards,Heidi P

October 16, 2015
Dear [redacted];
Thank you for taking the time today to discuss your complaint. First of all, let me apologize for any inconvenience and your frustration regarding the fees charged in relation to your recent home purchase and your mortgage with Guidance Residential. I want to assure you that I accept your explanation and will take the appropriate steps to ensure your complaint is voiced to our Human Resources Department and appropriate members of our Executive Management Committee. Second, I will have our Accounting Department prepare a check in the amount of $395.00 to resolve the misstatement of fees and to bring closure to this matter.
We at Guidance Residential appreciate your business and hope that we can assist you again in the future.
Best regards,
BillBill M.
Sr. Vice President

Check fields!

Write a review of Guidance Residential LLC

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Guidance Residential Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: Consumer Finance & Loan Companies

Address: 11109 Sunset Hills Rd Ste 200, Reston, Virginia, United States, 20190

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

This website was reported to be associated with Guidance Residential LLC.



Add contact information for Guidance Residential

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated