LoanDepot.com

Revdex.com Complaint#: [redacted]
Borrowers: [redacted] and [redacted]
RE: Loan Application [redacted]
Property Address: [redacted]
 
We sincerely regret to hear that the borrower, Mr. [redacted]
is not satisfied with our initial response.  At this
time our stance remains the same.  loanDepot respectfully
declines their request for further monetary compensation.
 
loanDepot charged  a
$395 lock fee. The lock fee collected from Mr. [redacted]
guaranteed that he would receive the quoted rate and fees for the specific
period of time disclosed to him over the phone and in writing on his lock agreement.
Upon the funding of the loan, the fee was credited towards his closing costs. This
credit is reflected on line 205 of the final settlement statement.  A copy of said document was provided in the
original response.
 
The lock fee is a non-refundable fee if a borrower elects
to withdraw their loan application after services have been rendered.  The only exception is when the application is
declined based on the information provided by the borrower prior to collecting
the lock fee.  Should a refund be
necessary, the refund is processed by Accounting within 24 hours. 
 
 After the lock fee
is collected, loanDepot secures a position on the secondary market for the borrower’s
loan and ensures that the rate selected is available at any time over the
period of the lock agreement.  Should the
borrower decide to discontinue the loan process with loanDepot, the fee will be
used to cover the cost of taking that position on the secondary market and the
non-delivery fees assessed to loanDepot. 
In addition the lock fee is used to cover services ordered on the borrower’s
behalf such as property appraisals, credit reports, underwriting fees,
etc.  
 
On December 29, 2014 Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] executed the Lock-in
Agreement and Advance Fee Notification Disclosure where they acknowledged and
agreed to the terms and conditions set thereof and outlined in this response. As
agreed, loanDepot issued a credit of the $395 lock fee to the borrower’s
closing costs.  
 
loanDepot schedules all final loan document signing appointments
per the request of our borrowers as their schedules permit. In this case, the
final loan document signing took place at a time that was selected by Mr. and
Mrs. [redacted].  loanDepot is very respectful
of the borrower’s time and accommodates these appointments at their convenience.
 Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]
had the option to select the time that best fit their work schedules and if the
original time was not convenient loanDepot would have rescheduled for them.
 
In
conclusion, loanDepot has addressed all concerns and already provided
compensation to the borrower to accommodate any inconveniences he encountered. Further
monies are not due. We appreciate his feedback received and would like for him
to know that it is taken very seriously.

Please see the attached Letter of Explanation.Thank You.San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #:  [redacted]  Borrower Name:  [redacted]  Complaint Date:     3/10/2015  Borrower’s Rebuttal:  The “lock-in” disclosure says th...⇄ [redacted] stating that he was sending my application to the underwrit...⇄

San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]Borrower Name: [redacted]Complaint Date: 1/13/2015Borrower’s Complaint Filed with the Revdex.com:I initiated a mortgage refinance with Lending Tree in December 2014, and was referred to LoanDepot. I contacted Loan Depot and initially worked with [redacted] who...

collected myinformation, including work and income, and completed the loan/refinance application. Iprovided to Mr. [redacted] that I had worked fulltime at an agency for 5 years and left that jobon September 30, 2014 to begin fulltime contract work. Mr. [redacted] told me that my 1099work that I began in October 2014 would not be a problem, that they would use my pastemployment to determine income. I was then immediately contacted by an individual who wasreferred by Loan Depot to appraise my home. The appraisal was completed on December 11,2014. My loan was then transferred to yet another individual within the company, [redacted]with whom I spoke on December 22, 2014 to find out the status of my loan. He told me it was onhis desk and he was sending it to underwriting that afternoon. I received two phone messagesfrom Mr. [redacted] after Christmas stating that he needed my W2s/recent paystubs. I returned hiscalls informing him that as I explained to Mr. [redacted], I was now performing contact worksince October 2014, thus had no recent paystubs/W2s. At that time I was getting frustrated as Iwas under the impression as well that my loan had already been sent to the underwriter, which ithadn't. On January 7, 2015, however I received an email from [redacted], ProductionSpecialist, stating my loan had been denied because I hadn't performed contact work for 2 yearsas required by their company.Borrower’s Desired Resolution:I worked with the company and was told by the first person in the early stage of the loan that Iwould qualify without any problem related to my limited time performing contract work. Had Iknown at that time, I would NOT have had my home appraised to complete the refinance. I paid$375 for the appraisal only to learn later my loan couldn't be approved due to information that Ishould have been given in the beginning. It was misleading and the process was not smoothlytransitioned. Potential applicants SHOULD be given correct information up front NOT after theyhave incurred unnecessary charges.loanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:1. Borrower claims that she was upfront in regards to her income situation and that there werecommunication issues between her and loanDepot.2. Borrower is requesting a refund of her deposit of $375.loanDepot Findings and Response:1. After doing a thorough file review, it was discovered that the borrower changed from a W-2employee to a self-employed, 1099 employee in October of 2014. Because the borrower does nothave a two year history of being self-employed, loanDepot had to respectfully decline herapplication. loanDepot sincerely apologizes that Ms. [redacted] felt like there was miscommunicationbetween her and loanDepot. Her concerns have been escalated to management and addressedinternally.2. Contrary to what the borrower stated above, she was charged a deposit in the amount of $395. As acustomer service concession due to the miscommunication between the borrower and loanDepotstaff regarding her employment, a full refund of $395 was successfully processed on January 23,2015 to the MasterCard ending in [redacted]. The transaction ID number is [redacted].In conclusion, loanDepot apologizes for the inconvenience Ms. [redacted] experienced regarding heremployment history and income. Because of this, we have issued a full refund in the amount of $395.Here at loanDepot, we have established responsible lending and customer service as our core values,and take all complaints seriously to ensure that our staff abides by our core beliefs.

Borrower’s Rebuttal Filed with the Revdex.com:I reject the response made by the business in reference complaint ID [redacted]. I havestatements in writing on the Application Disclosure form saying I will get the $425.00 appraisalfee refunded to me. See Attachment. This business has online reviews from people who complainabout this same issue of being cheated out of fees they are told would be refunded.Regards,[redacted]Borrower’s Desired Settlement from Initial Complaint:I would like to get my $495.00 loan start up fee backloanDepot Findings and Response:In the attached Application Disclosure in which was provided in Mr. [redacted]’s rebuttal to loanDepot’sinitial response to his complaint, it states the following:“The appraisal fee is refundable if the loan is denied or withdrawn prior to ordering the appraisal.”However, the appraisal was completed before loanDepot declined his loan application. It was discoveredin process that there was an open judgment of about $3,000 that Mr. [redacted] needed to pay his ex-spouse, and loanDepot would need court approval to proceed with the loan.  Furthermore, loanDepot only charged Mr. [redacted] $495 for the purpose of a lock deposit. This lock feecollected from the customer guarantees that the customer will receive the quoted rate and fees for aspecific period of time. After this fee is collected, loanDepot secures a position on the secondary marketfor the customer’s loan and ensures that the rate selected is available at any time over the period of thelock agreement. This $495 was also used for other expenses, such as ordering the appraisal report,credit reports, underwriting fees, etc.  loanDepot never charged Mr. [redacted] for a $425 appraisal. The borrower’s appraisal costs alone totaled$850. Please see the attached invoices.  In conclusion, loanDepot’s stance remains the same as we will not issue the refund in the amount of$495 to Mr. [redacted]. loanDepot did not profit from this loan application, as we incurred expenses andlosses on the borrower’s behalf that exceeded the $495 amount.

San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]Borrower Name: [redacted]Complaint Date: 1/19/2015 (Rebuttal)Borrower’s Rebuttal Filed with the Revdex.com:I appreciate loandepot.com's taking the time to respond to mycomplaint, and wanted to point out several inaccuracies in theirstatements:- It was [redacted], the senior mortgage banker, who suggested thevalue of $164,000, and not I who suggested that value. As theircontract notes "If your application is declined based on inaccurateinformation provided by YOU" (emphasis added). The property valueestimate was provided by Mr [redacted], and not by me.- As an expert in the field, Mr [redacted] should have a better idea ofhome values than I would. His excessively high estimate of $164,000compared to the appraised value of $119,000 is suspicious, and mayhave been a deliberate overestimate to entice me into paying theappraisal fee.- After the appraisal, I called loandepot.com on nearly a dailybasis, but they didn't answer or return my calls. If anyone wasunresponsive, it was loandepot.com, and not me.- Loandepot.com DID tell me about a second offer, but Mr [redacted]explicitly suggested that the offer wouldn't help me and recommendedthat I not take that offer. I simply followed Mr [redacted]'srecommendation.- However, if loandepot.com is still willing to offer me a loan thatgets me cash out, lowers my interest rate, and lowers my monthlypayment (all of which they originally promised), I will acceptit. Mr [redacted] explicitly told me that the post-appraisal offer wouldINCREASE my interest rate (which had presumably been locked in) andNOT get me any cash out.- I would like to ask that loandepot.com retain a copy of all phoneconversations they had with me, and, if possible, provide me with acopy of these recordings. I believe these recordings will helpreveal the truth in this matter, and any recordings I may have wouldbe of fairly low quality.Regards,[redacted]Borrower’s Desired Settlement from Initial Complaint:Refund of $395loanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:o On November 12, 2014, Mr. [redacted] executed the Lock-In Agreement and Advance Fee Notification onwhere he acknowledged that the estimated value of his property is $164,000. By executing thisagreement, Mr. [redacted] fully agreed to the value of $164,000.o As a consumer, Mr. [redacted] would have the best understanding of what his home is worth before anappraisal is completed. loanDepot is not in the business to entice customers to pay that $395deposit. loanDepot did not profit in any way on this transaction, as we were subject to additionalcosts with the appraisal, credit reports, underwriting fees, etc.o We apologize if the borrower feels that there was miscommunication between him and loanDepot.After a thorough file review, communication between Mr. [redacted] and loanDepot was done on aconsistent and timely manner.o When Mr. [redacted]’s Sr. Mortgage Banker offered him the second offer on December 23, 2014, Mr.[redacted] informed his Sr. Mortgage Banker that he will think about the offer and get back to him. Mr.[redacted] then went on to say to his Sr. Mortgage Banker that if he doesn’t hear from him, then he isprobably not interested in moving forward. Based off the file review, this was the last contact theborrower had with loanDepot prior to him requesting a refund of his deposit.o The initial pricing and lock was based on a property value of $164,000, as was discussed between Mr.[redacted] and his Sr. Mortgage Banker at the time of application. However, after receipt of the appraisalreport, it was discovered that the property's appraised value was $119,000. Because of the lowervalue, the loan-to-value (LTV) ratio increased above 80%, subjecting the loan to private mortgageinsurance (PMI). The low appraisal amount also only allowed for a rate and term refinance whicheliminated the benefits Mr. [redacted] was seeking which was to take cash out of the property andremove the PMI.o Unfortunately, loanDepot will not be able to release any recordings to Mr. [redacted]. All recordings arecompany proprietary information utilized for internal purposes. The only way to release anyrecordings would be with the receipt of a subpoena.In conclusion, our stance remains the same. A refund in the amount of $395 is not dueto Mr. [redacted]. Weapologize that Mr. [redacted]’s experience with loanDepot was anything less than satisfactory. Here at loanDepot,we have established responsible and fair lending.

Please see the attached Letter of Explanation regarding this complaint.Thank You.San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]Borrower Name:    [redacted]Complaint Date:    12/6/2014Borrower’s Complaint Filed with the Revdex.com:I was attempting to refinance my investment property at...

[redacted]. During the process, Iwas dealing with a broker named [redacted]. Just for background information, I had justrefinanced my personal residence at [redacted]. I experienced much difficulty duringthe process due to my debt to income ratio but my wife and I qualified using both of our incomesand we were able to get that done. So during the conversations with Loan Depot and [redacted] inparticular, I told him of my difficulties and that I wanted to refinance my rental property. I ownthis property with a partner who does not have excellent credit like mine and I was agreeable torefinance it in my name only. I sent Loan Depot all the information they requested including mypast 2 years tax returns as well as all financial documents requested. The investment property atBronx 10458 is a legal 3 family brick attached house of which there is presently a mortgagebalance of $69,500. I approximated the value of this property between $400,000 - $450,000. Iwas on a recorded line at all times in my conversations with loan depot. I was told that the nextstep was to order an appraisal of the property. I was seeking to borrow $200,000. which leftplenty of equity in the house ( more than 50%). My concern at this point was that I did not wantto waste my time or money on an appraisal if they were going to tell me later that I would notqualify because of debt to income ratio, so I specifically told him that I would do the appraisal aslong as I was assured that I would not be denied for reasons other than not enough equity in thehouse. I was confident that the house would appraise for over $400,000 which it did. theappraisal came in at $405,000. I received a call from on 12/2/14 from a Mr [redacted],Production Manager at Loan Depot NMLS# [redacted] saying I did not qualify for this loan even if Iput my wife's name on the loan.Borrower’s Desired Resolution:I wish to be refunded $395.00 for the appraisal report ordered. I would not have ordered thisreport if they told me upfront that my debt to income ratio was not even close for me qualifyingfor this loan. The sole purpose of my proceeding with the appraisal was to certify that the househad plenty of equity for which I was applying for the loanloanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:1. Borrower claims that he was upfront with his debt-to-income difficulties in refinancing.2. Borrower is requesting a refund of $395.loanDepot Findings and Response:1. Mr. [redacted] came to loanDepot on 10/27/2014 to discuss options on refinancing his investmentproperty at [redacted] After doing a thorough review of Mr. [redacted]’sfile, Mr. [redacted] did express his concerns regarding his debt-to-income issue to his Sr. MortgageBanker. However, loanDepot initially qualified Mr. [redacted] based on the information that wasdisclosed by him to his Sr. Mortgage Banker at the time of application. Please see the below andattached Uniform Residential Loan Application that was acknowledged and signed by Mr. [redacted].When the loan was in process, it was discovered from Mr. [redacted]’s tax returns that he reports noincome for the business. This inflated his debt-to-income ratio to be too high for loanDepot to lendupon and did not support what Mr. [redacted] stated at the time of application concerning his income.  2. On 11/4/2014, Mr. [redacted]’s was charged a $395 lock-in fee collected by credit card. Per New YorkBanking Law § 595-a N.Y. Comp. Code R. & Regulations, Banking Department § 38.6, a refund of thelock deposit must be issued if the loan is declined due to the borrower being found notcreditworthy. In this case, Mr. [redacted] was declined due to his debt-to-income being too high andtherefore, being not creditworthy for loanDepot to lend upon.  A full refund in the amount of $395 was issued to Mr. [redacted]’s MasterCard ending in [redacted] on12/18/2014. The transaction ID number is [redacted]0.In conclusion, loanDepot sincerely apologizes if Mr. [redacted]’s experience with loanDepot was anythingless than satisfactory. Mr. [redacted] did express his concerns regarding his debt-to-income ratio, but wasinitially qualified with what was disclosed by Mr. [redacted] at the time of application. In process, it wasdiscovered that the tax returns do not support what Mr. [redacted] stated his income to be at the time ofapplication. Ultimately, his loan was declined due his debt-to-income ratio being too high. Per New Yorkbanking laws, a full refund in the amount of $395 was issued to Mr. [redacted] on 12/18/2014. We regretthat we could not achieve Mr. [redacted]’s refinance goals.

San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]Borrower Name: [redacted]Complaint Date: 1/6/2015Borrower’s Complaint Filed with the Revdex.com:“I was lied to by Loan Depot. My initial conversation with a Loan Depot employee over the phone(I do not want to use names) helped me assume a value of my 75% LTV for...

my house duringinitial refinance process. When asking him several times via email what would happen if theappraisal comes lower he would call back and say "nothing will change on your loan regardingfees or rates as long as its 80% LTV". Sure enough the appraisal came in exactly at 80%, whichdidn't make sense as that was the value I purchased the home last year and spend over $30,000remodeling. When trying to amend the initial appraisal and get a second appraisal, I was heavilydiscouraged by a manager as he warned me that I may lose the loan due to time constraints.Since I was already invested $495 I didn't want that to happen. All my questions and concernswere also sent via email to him, yet I would only get calls back... makes sense to me now;"nothing on paper". Bottom line I ended up paying $1,200 more in fees than I should have out ofmy pocket. I called, texted, and emailed the initial Loan Depot employee several times after thechange in my loan and I never received a single response. He was probably ashamed to talk tome after lying to me over the phone. Very unprofessional. This isn't my first time refinancing. Ihave used other companies before and my experience with them have been flawless. So it seemslike a good scam; convince the client that nothing will change following assumptions as long asappraisal value is 80% LTV, take the $495 fee to trap the customer, then make any changes youwant to the rate or fees. I'm sure most people like me would rather move forward and pay theadditional $1,200 fee instead of losing the $495 already paid. If it's not a scam then Loan Depotshould do a better job training their employees to understand the process of how fees and ratescan possibly change.”Borrower’s Desired Settlement:Because of either incompetent employees, or the art of teaching employees to scam customers Iwant my $1,200 which I overpaid. I regretfully selected loandepot and could've used any othercompany that would not have charged me or treated me the way loandepot did.loanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:1. Borrower claims that he was told several times that nothing will change on his loan regarding therate and fees as long as the loan-to-value ratio (LTV) comes in at 80%.2. Borrower does not agree with the appraised value on his property, as he spent over $30,000 inremodeling.3. Borrower claims there were communication issues between him and loanDepot personnel, and feelsthat he was scammed.4. Borrower wants compensation of $1,200 of the fees in which he claims he overpaid.loanDepot Findings and Response:1. After doing a thorough file review, there appears to be no viable evidence that supports this claim.The borrower spoke to the Production Manager when the appraisal came in lower than anticipated,and the Production manager advised Mr. [redacted] that because the LTV of the propertychanged from 73% to around 78%, this was going to affect his pricing. The Production Manager alsocommunicated to him that because he came from “Bank Rate,” loanDepot could not change thepricing, as Mr. [redacted] was already getting the best pricing available that the market had tooffer at that time.2. It was discussed between the Mr. [redacted] and his Sr. Mortgage Banker on October 15, 2014that the estimated value of the property was $620,000. However, the appraised value came in at$580,000. loanDepot has no control over the appraisal process and cannot choose which appraiserto conduct the inspection. The appraisal process and inspection must be done independently as toensure there is no bias or predetermined value or agenda. The impartial local/certified appraiser(valuation expert) completes the appraisal based on the most similar and best data available in themarket. loanDepot has no reason to believe that an appraisal completed by an unbiased, impartiallocal, licensed expert is incorrect.3. loanDepot sincerely apologizes if the borrower felt that he was scammed and that there wasmiscommunication between him and loanDepot personnel. His concerns have been escalated tomanagement.4. Mr. [redacted] signed the Settlement Statement and closing documents on November 20, 2014with his loan successfully funding on November 25, 2014. His concerns regarding the fees of his loanwere brought to loanDepot’s attention on December 17, 2014. By signing the closing documents onhis loan, he acknowledged that he read, fully understood, and agreed to the terms and conditionsset thereof. Furthermore, Mr. [redacted] did not exercise the 3 day right to rescind the loan aftersigning said documents. The loan terms were fully disclosed and agreed upon.Based off of this, the loanDepot respectfully denies compensation in the amount of $1,200.In conclusion, loanDepot sincerely apologizes that Mr. [redacted]’s experience with loanDepot wasanything less than satisfactory in regards to the communication and fees of his loan. However, it wasdiscussed between Mr. [redacted] and the Production Manager that the pricing would be affecteddue to the property value being lower than anticipated which increased the overall LTV. loanDepot hasno control over the appraisal process and has no reason to believe that the appraisal report is incorrect,as an impartial local/certified appraiser was used to conduct the inspection. Because Mr. [redacted]executed and signed the closing documents on November 20, 2014 and did not exercise the 3 day rightto rescind on the loan being offered to him, in addition to his loan getting the best pricing availablebecause he came through Bank Rate, loanDepot denies compensation to Mr. [redacted] in theamount of $1,200.

San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]Borrower Name:    [redacted]Complaint Date:    1/6/2015Borrower’s Complaint Filed with the Revdex.com:I contacted loandepot.com about refinancing my home. They told me (in writing) that I could get$40,000+ out in cash AND get a lower interest rate...

AND lower my monthly payments. However,before they could process my application, they required an advance fee of $395. Per their terms,the fee was to be applied towards closing costs if the loan was approved, and refunded if theloan was not approved. The loan was not approved, but loandepot.com refused to refund mymoney. As the Revdex.com itself notes (http://www.Revdex.com.org/sdoc/industry-tips/read/tip/advance-fee-2769): "legitimate brokers traditionally deduct their fee from the loan IF AND WHEN that loan isapproved" Additionally, loandepot.com's contract says the fee is refundable if the loan is notapproved. Therefore, I am asking the Revdex.com to help me recover the $395 in losses.Borrower’s Desired Resolution:Refund of $395.00loanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:1. Mr. [redacted] claims that loanDepot offered him in writing that he could get $40,000+ out in cash, get alower interest rate, and lower his monthly payments.2. Borrower claims that per loanDepot’s terms, the $395 deposit was to be applied towards closingcosts if the loan was approved, and refunded if the loan was not approved. Borrower claims thatloanDepot’s contract states the fee is refundable if the loan is not approved.3. Borrower quotes the Revdex.com by stating “legitimate brokers traditionally deduct their fee from the loanIF AND WHEN that loan is approved.”loanDepot Findings and Response:1. Mr. [redacted] came to loanDepot on November 11, 2014. A program was identified and his loan waslocked into a conventional cash-out Conforming Fixed 30 year loan on this same day. At the timeof application, it was agreed upon between Mr. [redacted] and his Sr. Mortgage Banker that theappraised value of his property was $164,000 with a loan-to-value ratio (LTV) of 70%. As aconsumer, Mr. [redacted] would have the best understanding of what his home is worth before anappraisal is completed. With this estimated value of his property, loanDepot would be able to doa loan for Mr. [redacted] in which he would receive $40,000+ cash out, a lower interest rate, and alower monthly mortgage payment. However, when loanDepot received the appraisal report onNovember 17, 2014, which was completed by an impartial local/certified appraiser thatloanDepot has no control over the appraisal process, the value of Mr. [redacted]’s home came backat $119,000. This caused his overall LTV to increase in where he no longer qualified for the initialprogram and terms offered to him.In attempt to still help Mr. [redacted] financially, loanDepot tried to inform him that a new programwas identified with taking into account the $119,000 appraised value. However, Mr. [redacted] wasunresponsive and loanDepot had to respectfully decline his file on November 21, 2014 due tolow property value.    2. Mr. [redacted] was correct is saying that the $395 deposit would be applied towards his closing costsif the loan was final approved and successfully funded. However, his loan was not final approvedand did not close. In regards to this deposit being refunded if the loan was not approved, athorough file review has been conducted and there is no viable evidence that supports thisclaim.  The $395 deposit is collected by credit card. Prior to collecting the lock fee, loanDepot evaluatesthe customer’s needs and determines if they have a loan product that will help the customer.The company conducts an extensive screening process on the phone with the customer tocollect data and find the proper program that will fit the customer’s needs. If there is a matchand the customer is interested in moving forward with loanDepot, a Lock Script is read over thephone to inform them of their proposed rate and fees, the length of time the proposal is goodfor, and that the fee is non-refundable. loanDepot then emails the customer information aboutmoving forward with the loan.  Mr. [redacted] signed the Lock-In Agreement on November 12, 2014 where he acknowledged:“The $395.00 lock-in fee is NON-REFUNDABLE… If we fund your loan, the fee will be creditedtowards your closing costs on the settlement statement… If your application is declined basedon inaccurate information provided by you, or information discovered by loanDepot notdisclosed by you, or your property is deemed unfit to lend upon, the appraised value is lowerthan you stated the value to be… the lock-in fee is NON-REFUNDABLE. If you choose not tomove forward with another program offered to you or the appraised value is so low that yourloan is declined because there is no program available, the lock-in fee is NON-REFUNDABLE.”The credit card charge in the amount of $395 was acknowledged and agreed on November 12,2014 for the purpose of a lock fee. The lock fee collected guarantees that the customer willreceive the quoted rate and fees for a specific period of time. The lock fee is used by loanDepotto secure the rate agreed upon and the loan product chosen by the consumer for a set period oftime. Since the loan did not go through, this fee was used to cover the cost of taking thatposition on the secondary market and the non-delivery fees assessed to loanDepot. In addition,the lock fee was used to cover services ordered on the customer’s behalf such as propertyappraisals and credit reports.  Mr. [redacted]’s property value came in lower than expected. loanDepot attempted to offer Mr.[redacted] a new loan program, but Mr. [redacted] was unresponsive to our attempts and the loan wasultimately declined. Because Mr. [redacted] signed and acknowledged the Lock-In Agreement thatstates the above as well as gave verbal confirmation that the $395 is non-refundable, loanDepotrespectfully denies compensation of that $300 amount. Please see the attached Lock-InAgreement and Advance Fee Notification for your reference.  3. The borrower quotes the Revdex.com by stating that “legitimate brokers traditionally deduct their feesfrom the loan IF AND WHEN that loan is approved.” However, loanDepot is not a broker, but adirect lender. A direct mortgage lender is simply a bank or lender that works directly with ahomeowner, with no need for a middleman or broker. In the customer’s perspective when thecustomer works with a direct lender, that person applies with the same company who will bedocumenting, approving, and funding the home loan, serving as a one-stop shop.  In conclusion, Mr. [redacted] initially qualified for a loan program that had him receiving $40,000+ cash out,a lower interest rate, and an overall monthly mortgage payment. However, this was contingent on theappraised value of $164,000 in which was agreed upon between him and his Sr. Mortgage Banker at thetime of application. When the appraisal report came in, it valued Mr. [redacted]’s property at $119,000subsequently disqualifying him from the initial program and terms offered to him. loanDepot identifiedanother program for Mr. [redacted], but Mr. [redacted] was unresponsive to our attempts in reaching him, andhis loan ultimately was declined on November 21, 2014 due to low property value. Based off of this andaccording to the terms executed on the attached Lock-In Agreement and Advance Fee Notification, arefund of $395 is not warranted. loanDepot did not profit in any way on this transaction, as we weresubject to additional costs with the appraisal, credit reports, underwriting fees, etc. Although Mr. [redacted]states that legitimate brokers traditionally deduct their fees from the loan if and when the loan isapproved, loanDepot is not a broker, but a direct lender, conveniently serving as a one-stop shop to ourcustomers, eliminating the middleman or broker.  loanDepot sincerely apologizes that Mr. [redacted]’s experience with loanDepot was anything less thansatisfactory, and we regret we could not assist you in meeting your mortgage goals. Should Mr. Windomhave any questions or concerns, he may contact the Customer Care Department at 888-337-6888 ext.[redacted]. Representatives are available to assist him Monday through Friday from 8am to 5pm, PST.

San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]
Borrower Name: [redacted]
Complaint Date: 10/10/2014
Borrower’s Complaint Filed with the Revdex.com:
I received a Letter in the mail stated the following. Loan Depot could convert my FHA loan , and
get rid of my Mortgage insurance forever. I was not...

pursuing a Refi loan, however the letter was
very convincing and the rear of the letter stated , we must receive a response with in 35 day's or
we will have to re evaluate your application. I called and spoke with [redacted] . [redacted]
confirmed the letter was accurate and he ran my credit. [redacted] confirmed I was able to Refi.
[redacted] ask for a 300.00 deposit to process the application and he would send out an appraiser .
I waited a week to verify Loan Depot was an creditable company. Based on Internet Reviews ,
and an A rating with Revdex.com , I decided to go ahead with the REFI. Loan Depot sent out a Appraiser
who evaluated my property way below current market conditions, and replied they could not do
a REFI. I said ok I will just go somewhere else, please refund my $300.00. They refused.
Borrower’s Desired Settlement:
I feel they deceived me , I have the Letter that I scan and send for review. I'm asking for my
$300.00 back.
loanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:
1. Borrower states that he was told we could do a refinance for him.
2. Borrower is upset with the appraiser who valued his property lower than expected.
3. Borrower wants a refund of $300.
loanDepot Findings and Response:
1. When Mr. [redacted] came to loanDepot on September 11, 2014, he spoke to his Sr. Mortgage
Banker in attempts to get rid of his mortgage insurance. At that time, loanDepot originated the loan
on Mr. [redacted]’s property based on the information the he disclosed which included an estimate
of his property value.
2. loanDepot has no control over the appraisal process and cannot choose which appraiser to conduct
the inspection. The appraisal process and inspection must be done independently as to ensure there
is no bias or predetermined value or agenda. The impartial local/certified appraiser (valuation
expert) completes the appraisal based on the most similar and best data available in the market.
loanDepot has no reason to believe that an appraisal completed by an unbiased, impartial local,
licensed expert is incorrect.
3. Mr. [redacted] was charged a $300 lock fee. This fee is collected by credit card. Prior to collecting
this lock fee, loanDepot evaluates the customer’s needs and determines if they have a loan product
that will help the customer. The company conducts an extensive screening process on the phone
with the customer to collect data and find the proper program that will fit the customer’s needs. If
there is a match and the customer is interested in moving forward with loanDepot, a Lock Script is
read over the phone to inform them of their proposed rate and fees, the length of the time the
proposal is good for, and that the fee is non-refundable. loanDepot then emails the customer
information about moving forward with the loan.
Mr. [redacted] executed and signed the Lock-In Agreement on September 19, 2014 where he
acknowledged:
“If your application is declined based on inaccurate information provided by you, or information
discovered by loanDepot and not disclosed by you, or your property is deemed unfit to lend upon,
the appraised value is lower than you stated the value to be, or the income, assets, and
employment documents you provide do not support the information provided during the interview
process, the lock-in fee is NON-REFUNDABLE”
Also on September 20, 2014, the Lock Script was read to Mr. [redacted] stating that this fee is nonrefundable.
Mr. [redacted] gave verbal confirmation acknowledging this. The credit card charge in
the amount of $300 was agreed upon for the purpose of a lock fee. The lock fee collected from the
customer guarantees that the customer will receive the quoted rate and fees for a specific period of
time. The lock fee is used by loanDepot to secure the rate agreed upon and the loan product chosen
by the consumer for a set period of time. In this case, it was for 45 days. After the lock fee is
collected, loanDepot secures a position on the secondary market for the customer’s loan and
ensures that the rate selected is available at any time over the period of the lock agreement.
In addition, the $300 was also used for other expenses, such as to cover the cost of taking that
position on the secondary market, the non-delivery fees assessed to loanDepot, and to cover other
services ordered on the borrower’s behalf, such as property appraisal, credit reports, underwriting
fees, etc.
Mr. [redacted]’s property value came in lower than expected, and because of this, loanDepot had to
respectfully decline Mr. [redacted]’s loan application. Because Mr. [redacted] signed and
acknowledged the Lock-In Agreement as well as gave verbal confirmation that the $300 is nonrefundable,
loanDepot respectfully denies compensation of that $300 amount. Please see the
attached Lock-In Agreement and Advance Fee Notification for your reference.
In conclusion, loanDepot did not profit from this loan application, as we incurred expenses and losses on
the borrower’s behalf that exceeded the $300 amount. We ordered an appraisal, ran credit reports, title
reports, and were subject to losses on other services rendered during the process. Based off the
supporting documentation and explanations listed above, a refund of $300 is not warranted to Mr.
[redacted].

Revdex.com Complaint#: [redacted]
Borrowers: [redacted] and [redacted]
RE: Loan Application [redacted]
Property Address: [redacted]
 
 
We lament that Mr. [redacted] does not agree with our stance.
 
As previously conveyed in our originally response lifelock
was issued to all parties involved as a result of a clerical issue internally. Because
loanDepot values the privacy and security of all of our borrowers this service
was extended to those affected.   A formal apology was also issued in writing
and the unfortunate error was addressed to the highest extended with our staff.
Mr. [redacted]
was advised of this information directly and also through the RevDex.com response submitted by our company. loanDepot will not be providing Mr.
[redacted]
with our communications with the other party for security purposes.
 
During the
origination process of his loan, we assigned a loan number, however, once the
servicing of his loan has been established; a new loan number is created and
provided. Mr. [redacted]’s first payment is due on
April 1, 2015 in the amount of $1, 871.48. 
His servicing loan number is [redacted]. During the first 30 days after the
loan is funded, we are unable to establish an automated payment process. He can
make an online payment or register for future auto-draft once he registers at [redacted].  For
further details regarding the servicing of his loan he can contact our
dedicated Servicing Team by calling our toll free number
or by emailing customer service at the following:
 
Toll Free -  [redacted] – Hours are M-F 5:00 am to 5:00
pm, Pacific Time
Email – [redacted]
 
At this time
loanDepot has addressed all of Mr. [redacted]’s
concerns.  Further compensation is not due.

Complaint Number:
      [redacted]            
Customer:           [redacted]
Loan...

#:                 [redacted] and [redacted]
 
We appreciate the borrower expressing their concerns
through the Revdex.com. lt ensures they abide by their core beliefs
and operates within industry guidelines. 
  
 
loanDepot charges  a
$300 lock fee.  This fee is by credit
card.  The lock fee collected from the
customer guarantees that the customer will receive the quoted rate and fees for
a specific period of time, usually 30 to 45 days.  Upon the funding of the customer’s loan, the
fee is credited towards the customer’s closing costs. 
 
The lock fee is a non-refundable fee.  The only exception is when the application is
declined based on the information provided by the customer prior to collecting
the lock fee.  
 
The lock fee is used by loanDepot to secure the rate
agreed upon and loan product chosen by the consumer for a set period of time.  After the lock fee is collected, loanDepot
secures a position on the secondary market for the customer’s loan and ensures
that the rate selected is available at any time over the period of the lock
agreement.  Should the customer decide to
discontinue the loan process with loanDepot, the fee will be used to cover the
cost of taking that position on the secondary market and the non-delivery fees
assessed to loanDepot.  In addition the
lock fee is used to cover services ordered on the customer’s behalf such as
property appraisals, credit reports, underwriting fees, etc.  
 
Prior to collecting the lock fee, loanDepot evaluates the
customer’s needs and determines if they have a loan product that will help the
customer.  The company conducts an
extensive screening process on the phone with the customer to collect data and
find the proper program that will fit the customer’s needs.    If
there is a match and the customer is interested in moving forward with
loanDepot, a Lock Script is read to the customer over the phone to inform them
of their proposed rate and fees, the length of time the proposal is good for,
and that the fee is non-refundable.  loanDepot
then emails the customer information about moving forward with the loan. 
 
Mr. [redacted] began the loan process on 8/27/2014, and on 8/28/2014
he signed a Lock-In Agreement where he acknowledged:
 
 “If your application is declined based on
inaccurate information provided by you, or information discovered by
loanDepot and not disclosed by you, or your property is deemed unfit to lend
upon, the appraised value is lower
than you stated the value to be, or the income, assets, and employment
documents you provide do not support the information provided during the
interview process, the lock-in fee is
NON-REFUNDABLE.”
 
It further states:
 
“If you
choose not move forward with another program offered to you or the appraised value is so low that your loan
is declined because there is no program available, the lock-in fee is
NON-REFUNDABLE.”
 
 In this case Mr. [redacted]
stated at the time of application that his home’s value was approximately $355,000
giving his a loan to value (LTV) of 80%. However when loanDepot received the
appraisal that was ordered on Mr. [redacted]’s home, the actual property value was
$305,000 which pushed his LTV up to 93%, this unfortunately negatively affected
his loan because it surpassed the maximum LTV allowed per his loan terms. Therefore,
per the Lock-in Agreement which Mr. [redacted] signed no refund is due.
 
 Mr. [redacted] applied
for a second time with loan Depot and began a new loan process on 11/25/2014,
and on 11/30/14 he signed a Lock-In Agreement where he acknowledged and again
agreed to the $395 non-refundable lock fee.  However, as a gesture of good faith we only
collected $100.  Said loan was also
declined due to a low value appraisal. As a customer concession to Mr. [redacted]
and in good faith a refund of the $100 was approved and processed on February
16, 2015. The refund was processed as a credit to Mr. [redacted]’s Visa ending in
1827. The transaction ID is 6928325863.  
 
Included are the following documents:
 
1)     
Lock Agreements (signed)

San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]
Borrower Name: [redacted]
Complaint Date: 10/23/2014
Borrower’s Complaint Filed with the Revdex.com:
I was told by [redacted] of Loandepot before applying for a loan that if for any reason my loan was not
approved or funded I would receive a refund of...

my deposit. I was also told that I would also receive a
credit back for the deposit at closing. At the expiration of the 45-day lock on 10/20/2014 I was notified
that my loan was not approved and asked for my deposit back. Mr. [redacted] told me that they will not
refund me my deposit.
Borrower’s Desired Settlement:
I would like my deposit refunded as per the terms of our conversation ($495)
loanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:
1. Borrower claims that he was told by his Sr. Mortgage Banker that if for any reason his loan was not
approved or funded, he would receive his refund of his deposit. Borrower claims he would receive a
refund of the deposit back at closing.
2. Borrower is requesting a refund of his $495 deposit.
loanDepot Findings and Response:
1. After doing a thorough file review, loanDepot found no viable evidence that the deposit would be
refunded back to the borrower if the loan did not go through for any reason. The borrower was
correct in stating that he would be getting that deposit at closing; however his loan did not close.
Mr. [redacted]’s loan was declined due to late payments on his second mortgage (home equity line of
credit) that was discovered while the loan was in process.
2. For Mr. [redacted], loanDepot charged him a $495 lock fee. This fee is collected by credit card. Prior to
collecting the lock fee, loanDepot evaluates the customer’s needs and determines if they have a loan
product that will help the customer. The company conducts an extensive screening process on the
phone with the customer to collect data and find the proper program that will fit the customer’s
needs. If there is a match and the customer is interested in moving forward with loanDepot, a Lock
Script is read over the phone to inform the borrower of their proposed rate and fees and additional
terms on the loan being secured. loanDepot then emails the customer information about moving
forward with the loan.
Mr. [redacted] signed the Lock-In Agreement and Advance Fee Notification on September 4, 2014 where
he acknowledged:
“if your application is declined based on inaccurate information provided by you, or information
discovered by loanDepot and not disclosed by you, or your property is deemed unfit to lend upon,
the appraised value is lower than you stated the value to be, or the income, assets, and employment
documents you provide do not support the information provided during the interview process, the
lock-in fee is NON-REFUNDABLE.”
The credit card charge in the amount of $495 was acknowledged and agreed on September 4, 2014
for the purpose of a lock fee. The lock fee collected from the customer guarantees that the
customer will receive the quoted rate and fees for a specific period of time. The lock fee is used by
loanDepot to secure the rate agreed upon and the loan product chosen by the consumer for a set
period of time. In this case, it was for 45 days. After the lock fee is collected, loanDepot secures a
position on the secondary market for the customer’s loan and ensures that the rate selected is
available at any time over the period of the lock agreement.
In addition, the $495 was also used for other expenses, such as to cover the cost of taking that
position on the secondary market, the non-delivery fees assessed to loanDepot, and to cover other
services ordered on the borrower’s behalf, such as property appraisals, credit reports, underwriting
fees, etc.
As stated above, Mr. [redacted]’s loan was declined due to late payments on his second mortgage
(home equity line of credit) that was discovered while the loan was in process. Attached is fully
executed the Lock-In Agreement and Advance Fee Notification for your reference.
In conclusion, loanDepot apologizes for the borrower’s experience with loanDepot. loanDepot was
unable to continue with this refinance as it was found out while in process that the borrower was past
due on his payments to his second mortgage/home equity line of credit. Because of this and the
supporting information stated above, loanDepot respectfully denies compensation of that $495 lock fee.
Here at loanDepot, we have established responsible lending and customer service as our core values.

Hello,I have recently filed a complaint against LoanDepot.com.  I had requested they do not continue the loan process being that they have not kept the initial agreement and wanted me to sign incorrect paperwork.  They pulled my credit again on 2/18.  Which was not authorized or...

requested to do so.  I noticed they used the same name as they did in Oct this time.    This was just for informational purposes to add with my complaint.Thank you.[redacted]

San Diego Revdex.com Complaint #: [redacted]Borrower Name: [redacted]Complaint Date: 11/19/2014Borrower’s Rebuttal Filed with the Revdex.com:"In conclusion, Mr. [redacted] did qualify for the refinance initially when he spoke to his Sr. MortgageBanker based off the information that transpired between him and the Sr. Mortgage Banker.However, it was required for the borrower to have at least 6 months of liquid reserves since theproperty is a non-owner occupied investment property."Again, I was initially disqualified by the non-Sr Mortgage Bankers at LoanDepot.com for therefinance , a fact I reminded the Sr. Mortgage Banker of when he contacted me later. He assuredme that he was a "specialist" and assured me that I could qualify.The business' response is self contradictory "Mr. [redacted] did qualify" yet "However, it was requiredfor the borrower to have at least 6 months of liquid reserves". Thus I "qualified" yet did not meetthe "requirements". This does not make sense. I do not think that I should have to pay $495because LoanDepot.com does not realize that "qualify" and "meet requirements" aresynonymous.I have also looked at the "lock-in" agreement which appears to protect the company from me ina court of law, yet I still feel that I was a victim of a "Bait and Switch" operation perpetrated byLoanDepot.com.Regards,[redacted]Borrower’s Desired Resolution from Initial Complaint:I want a refund of my $495 processing fee.loanDepot’s Borrower Complaint Summary:1. Borrower claims that he was disqualified by a non-Sr. Mortgage Banker.2. Borrower claims that he was assured he qualified, and thinks it is contradictory that he initiallyqualified, but didn’t meet the requirements.3. Borrower feels that he was a victim of a “bait and switch” operation.loanDepot Findings and Response:1. The person who took the application for Mr. [redacted] is nationally and state-specifically licensed forCalifornia through the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry (NMLS). Regardless oftitle, the Sr. Mortgage Banker/Specialist was authorized to speak to Mr. [redacted] to discuss rates, fees,loan options, etc.2. As stated in the initial response, the borrower was initially eligible based off the information thatwas discussed between him and his Sr. Mortgage Banker at the time of application. At said time,loanDepot originated the loan on Mr. [redacted]’ property based on the information that Mr. [redacted]disclosed. It was later found out while the loan was in process that he did not meet the 6 months ofreserves which were a requirement for his refinance. Mr. [redacted]s failed to disclose this informationduring the origination stage of his loan request.3. loanDepot apologizes that Mr. [redacted] feels that he was a victim of a “bait and switch.” After athorough file review, there is no viable evidence that shows that this borrower was a victim of “baitand switch.”In conclusion, our stance remains the same in not approving a refund in the amount of $495 to Mr.[redacted]. As stated in the initial response, loanDepot did not profit from this loan application, as weincurred expenses and losses on the borrower’s behalf that exceeded the $495 amount. We ordered anappraisal, ran credit reports, title reports, and were subject to losses on other services rendered duringthe process. We regret to hear that Mr. [redacted]’ experience with loanDepot was anything less thansatisfactory and that we could not meet Mr. [redacted]’ refinance needs. Here at loanDepot, we practiceresponsible and fair lending.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Loan Depot states:"At said time, loanDepot originated the loan on Mr. [redacted]’ property based on the information that Mr. [redacted] disclosed. It was later found out while the loan was in process that he did not meet the 6 months of reserves which were a requirement for his refinance.  Mr. [redacted]s failed to disclose this information during the origination stage of his loan request."This statement implies that I withheld information from the Sr. Mortgage Agent. This is not true. The Sr. Mortgage Agent did not inform me at any time that 6 months reserves were required for my refinance prior to my rejection. Each time I spoke to a loanDepot representative, I was informed that all calls were recorded. I defy loanDepot to show evidence that I failed to disclose ANY information that was requested of me during ANY of those calls. Remember, I informed the Sr. Mortgage Agent that other people from his firm had rejected my loan request when he first spoke to me. He was the one that pursued further action. If he had not assured me that I "qualified" for the loan, I would not have paid $495. LoanDepot claims that they did not profit from the transaction. I claim that I LOST $495 that I cannot afford. If this was not a "bait and switch" it was incompetence. The explanation that I initially "qualified" but that the underwriter later "discovered" that I did not qualify might serve as a valid excuse for the Sr. Mortgage Agent's actions within the loanDepot organization but it does not convince me.  I do not think that I should have to pay for loanDepot's incompetence.My documentation for possible Revdex.com arbitration consists of my July 2014 bank statement which shows a debit card transaction for loanDepot on June 13. That is the only documentation that I have, since I claim that I was not asked about 6 months of reserves. If loanDepot can prove otherwise, I will be happy to drop my complaint.
Regards,
[redacted]