Home Finance Of America

Review: Hello

Early May 2013, I applied for a refinace mortgage, to which I was not told, that the Mortgage company required a two year concurrent job history with the same employer when I spoke to the loan processor who was to process my mortgage loan.

I sent all required W2S and itemized 2011-2012 tax information to the processor, to get this process rolling, she either did not look at my job history nor did she listen to me about my job status, while I was telling her that information, as she asked me this on the first initial phone conversation.

Tuesday 6/21/13 she calls me and said the loan denied based on my employment status, she also stated she will try to get this overturned, yesterday at 5:10 pm she calls, telling me that they are denying the loan.

The company required the Appraisal fee and credit check payment about 1 week after I spoke to her as that is policy to get loan going forward, I paid $415.00 appraisal fee and $13.00 credit report fee, the loan processor states she was not sure I would be refunded, ?( I think that is only fair ) as they made the initial error in processing the information I gave them about the employment status.

The worst part of this, is the wasted month , almost 2 months now ,to which the rates have gone 1.2% higher which really does not help me , and I feel I was defrauded of a lower rate and no gaurantee of a refund

Thank You

[redacted]Desired Settlement: I would like the company to tell the consumer at first contact, of the policy regarding employment status, before they start to talk mortgage rates, so a person like me does not get kicked in the [redacted] due to someone elses negligence. I request all monies to be refunded

Business

Response:

Hello,

I had a conversation with the Loan Originator prior to receiving this complaint. Although HFA have paid for the 3rd party services (appraisal/credit report), due to the misunderstanding I had already authorized the refund of all monies received from [redacted]. I was refunded to the card that was originally charged for these services. Please allow a few days for the refund to be reflected in your account.

Thank you,

Review: On April 25, 2013, we paid for and signed paperwork that a mortgage rate of 3.25% was locked in by HFA for settlement on our new house ([redacted]) on June 26, 2013. On May 3, the house that we currently resided in ([redacted]) was under contract to settle on July 12. We emailed HFA that day, one day after we filled out our loan package for our new house, and let them know that settlement was 2 weeks after our closing and also emailed them the agreement for sale on May 6.

On the original Mortgage Commitment letter we received from HFA, one of the requirements for our loan was for “receipt of funds from sale of [redacted].” We were confused by this since HFA knew that [redacted] was not settling until 2 weeks later.

After much back and forth among HFA, our realtor ([redacted], [redacted]), and ourselves, we were sent a new commitment letter on June 10. The email from HFA (Molly K[redacted]) says, “My underwriter has checked that stipulation as N/A and signed it. Thanks!” The new commitment letter had the underwriter’s signature (Bill B[redacted]) and N/A signed next to the sale of [redacted]. As far as we knew, and we were told, everything was good to go for our June 26 settlement.

On Friday, June 21, just 3 business days before our settlement, we received a phone call from Molly K[redacted] saying that our loan was not being approved due to [redacted] not being settled first. We were in shock considering we had a signed commitment letter that specifically states “Your application for a first mortgage loan has been approved subject to the following matters set forth” and the sale of [redacted] was signed off as N/A by an underwriter at HFA.

We were stuck, it was 3 days before we were supposed to close and we did not have the 3.25% rate that we had signed documentation for, not to mention a mortgage at all. HFA told us the best they could do for us was giving us a rate of 3.875% and be able to settle in 7 business days. We asked about the signed commitment letter and their response to us was that they did not know who signed it, and for all HFA knew, it could have been forged. This amazed us since we still had the printed out email from Molly K[redacted] that her underwriter had signed it as N/A.

Due to the essence of time, we were forced to stay with HFA if we still wanted to buy our house. We were not happy, but we had no choice, they backed us into a corner and we did not want to lose our new house, especially since [redacted] was sold and we would have had no place to live if things fell through. We proceeded to close on our new home on July 1, at 3.875% rate.Desired Settlement: We would appreciate your assistance in resolving our complaint. Due to the higher interest rate, we are losing $42,562.38 of interest over our 30 year loan. Above that, our monthly payment, which went up by $118.23, was to be invested for our future. Even at just a 5% rate of return, that is costing us another $83,230.33 over the same 30 years. HFA cost us $118.23 per month, but much more importantly, is costing us a total of $125,792.71 over the next 30 years.

We would like HFA to compensate us for the $42,562.38 worth of interest.

Review: We signed up to get a refinance on our home. We got all of the paperwork in, in a timely manner and the appraisal came back high enough. [redacted] told us that the appraisal came back with a red flag and would have to have a second appraisal done. She told us it came back Thursday night and said she would get back to us about our options since our 30 days ended on Saturday (probably a 3 day extension). We tried to contact her and heard nothing Friday or Monday. We were finally able to get ahold of her on Tuesday. She said we had lost our original rate. We were not given an option of an extension and we feel that it was this companies fault for it taking the extra time so they should have to pay the consequences, not us.Desired Settlement: We would like our originally promised rate back.

Business

Response:

Hello,

Unfortunately for both **.[redacted] and Home Finance of America, [redacted]'s underwriting engine indicated a Red Flag stating that the collateral assesment model indicates the value estimate made by the appraiser appears to have a excessive rate of appreciation and the value of the property must be reviewed carefully. When this finding is recieved relating to the collateral for the loan, a second review appraisal must be done to ensure the original appraiser has not overstated value and the submitted value is in fact supported. **. [redacted] had a 30 day rate lock and despite the efforts of Home Finance of America to rush the review appraisal, it was not received in time to review and close within the lock period.

Although the appaisal and the review appraisal had a cost which far exceeded the amount collected for the appraisal from **. [redacted], as a measure of good faith Home Finance of America will cover the cost for both appraisal and credit report services and refund all monies collected from **. [redacted] for these services. The amount of $466 will be refunded to the credit card originally used by **. [redacted]. Please allow a few days for the reversal of the charge to be reflected in the account. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Vice President

Home Finance of America

Consumer

Response:

[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]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because while we appreciate the refund we still feel that we have lost more than this amount in the process. We should have been given the opportunity for an extension as most other companies would have done. [redacted] did not even respond to us with any options until well after our 30 days was up even though the second appraisal was done with 2 days still left before our rate lock ended. We can no longer get any similar rates as rates that were being offered at the time and that is because HFA took too long in its processes. Also, as stated in the last response, the appraisal was far in excess of the value needed to proceed so even if it had been appraised slightly too high (which the second appraisal proved that it was not) there should not have been enough cause to delay closing. Therefore, we feel that we should be offered our original rate back as it was their fault and not ours that it did not close in the 30 day time period.

Regards,

Business

Response:

Hello,

Even though HFA was not responsible for the loan not closing within the lock period, all monies have been refunded to the borrower even though HFA has incurred these third party costs.

Thank you

Consumer

Response:

[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]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because HFA was responsible for our loan not closing in the 30 days and have cost us thousands of dollars by not closing it in time.

Regards,