Washington Federal Inc

Revdex.com: PLEASE CL AND ZERO BALANE OWED.I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to meSincerely, *** ***

Dear Revdex.com: This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal (“the Bank”) from the Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”) on June 3, The Bank has already responded to this Complaint in its response (“Original Response”) on June 3, In the Complaint, the customer alleges Section of the Deed of Trust is only applicable if the liens are superior to the Deed of Trust and that mechanics liens never take priorityThe customer further alleges that he wasn't in default as he paid all monthly payments on timeWe appreciate the opportunity to respond furtherIn Section (1)(a) of the Deed of Trust states that the customer shall keep the property free from all taxes, assessments, charges, fines, and impositions attributable to the property and that the borrower shall promptly discharge any lien which has priorityUnder Texas Statute, a mechanics lien may attach to a house and take preference over other liens or mortgagesIn the Default Section of the Loan Agreement, it states that a default occurs when the borrower violates, fails to comply with, or defaults on any provision or on any obligation owed by the borrower to the lenderThe mechanics liens placed against the property caused the defaultThe default was not to due to failure to make payments on the loanThe Bank spoke with the customer on June 9, 2016, to provide further clarification regarding the concern(s) and the customer seemed satisfied with the responseThe Bank appreciates the opportunity to further clarify and requests that the matter be closedSincerely, Monsy M*** Compliance Officer & Interim Compliance Manager

Complaint: ***I am rejecting this response because:
That is correct, I spoke to General Counsel at WAFD on June 9th and their attorney explained more background regarding recent case law which could cause mechanics liens to take priority over the Deed. She was also very helpful to take the time to discuss my concerns and I wish she was involved months ago when this problem started. If she was this would have probably turned out much differently. The General Counselor has agreed to refund the WAFD attorney fees that I paid, as a gesture of good will. Once I receive the refund I will go back into Revdex.com to mark this issue as being resolved.Sincerely,*** ***

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to meThank youI tried and tried to talk to the business directly and they just seemed dumbfoundedThey gave you the response I wanted and refunded my fees as well. Sincerely, *** ***

April 15,
Via Online Portal
P.OBox
DuPont, WA
RE: *** ***, Complaint #***
Dear Revdex.com:
This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal “the Bank”), from the Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”)
on April 4, In the Complaint, *** *** (“Ms***”) alleges that she filed Chapter Bankruptcy but that her loan is incorrectly reporting 120-days late on her credit reportShe also alleges that she was told that her account is $delinquent and that she was treated disrespectfully by Bank staffWe appreciate the opportunity to respond
Ms***’s Chapter Bankruptcy was discharged in January of Ms*** contacted the Bank via phone on April 6, During that conversation, Ms*** was told that her Chapter Bankruptcy was discharged in January 2016, and that the debt was not reaffirmedThe Bank will submit a status change to update the credit bureau(s) to reflect the Bankruptcy
The Bank regrets any confusion that Ms*** experienced in her conversations with Bank personnel regarding the status of the loan
The Bank prides itself on its staff being respectful and courteous to all of its customersThe Bank investigated and found no indication that Ms*** was treated disrespectfullyThe Bank’s Assistant Manager, Mike S*** has reached out to Ms*** via phone and left a message but has not heard back from Ms***
We appreciate the opportunity to respond and respectfully request that the matter be closed
Sincerely,
Monsy M***
Compliance Officer and Interim Compliance Manager

August 8,
Via Online Portal
P.OBox
DuPont, WA
RE: *** *** Complaint #***
Dear Revdex.com:
This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal (“the Bank”), from the RevDex.com (“Revdex.com”) on August 1, In the Complaint, the customer alleges that his autopay has not paid his bills in over a month, that the transactions do not show on his mobile app., and that he has received insufficient funds fees assessed on his accountWe appreciate the opportunity to respond
The customer’s auto bill payments were processed as requested every two weeksIf the payee of the bill pay does not have an agreement with the bill pay processor to receive electronic payments, a paper draft check is sentThis process is just as if a person sent a handwritten check to an individual or an organizationThe check will not be paid until the payee negotiates the item. It is possible that the payee has changed the way they are processing payments or they may be holding incoming payments until a set number of checks are received prior to processing themThe latter appears to be the case, as more than one payment to a religious organization was presented for payment on June 14, and three were presented for payment on July 6, causing the overdraft fees
The mobile appshows pending scheduled payments as well as transactions that have posted to the accountOnce the paper draft check from bill pay has been mailed but has not yet been negotiated, it will not show on the mobile appsince it is no longer pending nor has it been negotiated
The branch reversed one of the four insufficient funds fees on July 15, Because the Bank values its customer relationships, the Bank has refunded back the other three insufficient funds fees, in the amount of $75, on August 3,
We appreciate the opportunity to respond and respectfully request that the matter be closed
Sincerely,
Brent R***
Consumer Compliance Officer

September 30,
Dear Revdex.com:
This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal (“the Bank”), from the Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”) on September 22, In the Complaint, the consumer alleges that the Bank
failed to close his account and reverse a feeWe appreciate the opportunity to respond
The consumer was still utilizing his debit card and transactions were still posting to the account through August 26, On August 26, point of sale purchases posted to his account and caused his account to be overdrawnThere were no service fees assessed to the account with regard to these transactionsThe Bank researched both with the consumer’s branch of account as well as with the Client Care Center and has no record regarding a request to close the account: however, the Bank has closed the account effective September 26,
We appreciate the opportunity to respond and respectfully request that the matter be closed
Sincerely,
Brent R***
Consumer Compliance Officer

March 15, 2017   Via Online Portal 1000 Station Dr., Ste. 222 DuPont, WA. 98327   RE: Complaint, #[redacted]   Dear Revdex.com:   This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Complaint”) sent to Washington Federal by the Revdex.com on March 8,...

2017. The consumer alleges that they are dissatisfied with the upcoming changes to their checking accounts. We appreciate the opportunity to respond.   It has been several years since Washington Federal updated its consumer checking accounts.  Starting March 1, we retired our three existing options and introduced three new accounts with different terms and pricing. In doing so, we notified our existing clients who reside in Idaho that we would be transitioning their current account to a new account as of April 1, 2017. We are very excited about the value we’re able to provide our clients with the new Green and Stellar Plus checking accounts and are encouraging our clients to try these products and have selected these as the “default” account for transition if we don’t hear from our clients ahead of April 1, 2017.  These new accounts include identity theft protection, mobile phone and AD&D insurance, extended buyers’ warranties and shopping and pharmacy/dental care discounts. The Green account also offers the predictability of a flat $6 monthly fee that’s not dependent upon minimum balances.   However, as stated in both of the letters of notification mailed out to our clients, we have a third new option called Basic Checking that requires direct deposit and eStatement enrollment, and limits checks to 25 per monthly cycle with a fee of $0.15 for additional checks. We no longer offer Simple Checking, which was a no-minimum balance, no maintenance fee account with no eStatement or direct deposit requirement and no limit on check writing.   Our letters encouraged clients to call us with questions so we may discuss the best-fitting account. We are more than happy to switch the consumer immediately to our Basic, Green or Stellar Plus account based on your wishes. We apologize if the letter that the consumer received caused them undue concern and hope we’re able to work with them to continue to meet their meeting needs.   Sincerely,     Brent R[redacted] Consumer Compliance Officer

May 2, 2016
Via Online Portal
P.O. Box...

1000                                      ...⇄
DuPont, WA. 98327
RE: [redacted], Complaint #[redacted]
Dear Revdex.com:
This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal “the Bank”), from the Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”) on April 27, 2016. In the Complaint, [redacted] (“Ms. [redacted]”) alleges that over the last ten months there have been delays in receiving draws for her custom construction loan and that the Bank required Ms. [redacted] to take a final draw on the custom construction loan even though Ms. [redacted] indicated that those funds would not be needed. We appreciate the opportunity to respond.
The Bank’s draw policy was fully explained to Ms. [redacted] in January of 2015. Ms. [redacted] acknowledged the Bank’s draw procedures and signed the Custom Construction Loan Guidelines & Practices Form. On a custom construction loan, certain work needs to be completed as well as certain certifications, forms, and/or documents need to be signed off and provided to the Bank prior to the Bank disbursing funds for draws. The draw disbursement requests were all signed for. The Bank charged interest only on the loan funds disbursed and not on the funds to be distributed in the future.
It appeared that there may have been some misunderstanding as to how the Bank’s custom construction draw process works versus if Ms. [redacted] were to build a dwelling completely out of pocket without borrowing money from a financial institution. It was not the understanding of the Bank in January of 2016 that Ms. [redacted] wanted to pay the loan balance off. The Bank waited until April 2016 to disburse the remaining funds because the required work was not completed until then. The final inspection was done on March 29, 2016 and the certificate of occupancy was not signed off until April 4, 2016.  The Bank disbursed the last budgeted draw funds on April 5, 2016. 
A Bank Executive spoke with Ms. [redacted] on April 16, 2016. The Bank refunded two months of interest on the loan in the amount of $1,707.75. The Bank also refunded $150 for the final appraisal. The checks were sent certified mail on April 19, 2016. Ms. [redacted] paid the custom construction loan off on April 15, 2016.
The Bank values the relationships it establishes with its customers and regrets any confusion that Ms. [redacted] may have experienced during the custom construction loan draw process.
We appreciate the opportunity to respond and respectfully request that the matter be closed.
Sincerely,
Monsy M[redacted]
Compliance Officer and Interim Compliance Manager

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because: section 4 of deed of trust is only applicable if the liens are superior to the deed of trust which is it not.  The mechanics liens never take priority over the deed of trust, especially if they are filed afterwards.  There was nothing to enforce  because of this.  I wasn't in default either as I paid all monthly payments on time with extra principal payments.Sincerely,[redacted]

RE: [redacted],Complaint #[redacted] This is in response to the above mentioned complaint letter (the "Complaint") received by Washington Federal (the "Bank") from the Revdex.com (the "Revdex.com") on June 29, 2015. In the Complaint [redacted] (" MS. [redacted]") alleges that she was...

charged an NSF fee when she had sufficient funds in her account. She also alleges that a Bank representative indicated she would not be charged a fee and that she was nevertheless. We appreciate the opportunity to respond. The Bank has researched Ms. [redacted]'s account and found that on May 22, 2015, Ms. [redacted] had an $87.10 payment to [redacted] reject due to insufficient funds in the account and received a $20.00 NSF fee. Her available balance at the time the payment rejected was $8.59. That same day her payment was presented, on May 22, 2015, Ms. [redacted] made a deposit in the branch. However, the $87.10 payment to [redacted] had already been presented and returned before the deposit was made. No holds were placed on the deposit. On June 19,2015, Ms. [redacted] made three ATM deposits, and all but $200 was placed on hold through June 24, 2015. A payment to [redacted] for $184.41 was presented and paid on June 23, 2015. At the time of the payment to [redacted], Ms. [redacted]'s available balance was $118.11. The $20.00 NSF fee was waived by the Bank as the funds were on hold at the time the [redacted] payment was presented. We appreciate the opportunity to respond and respectively request that the matter be closed.

June 3, 2016 Via Online Portal P.O. Box 1000 DuPont, WA. 98327 RE: [redacted], Complaint #[redacted] Dear Revdex.com: This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal (“the Bank”), from the Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”) on May 26, 2016. In...

the Complaint, the customer alleges that mechanics liens were placed against his property and that he is in default under Section 4 of the Deed of Trust. The customer alleges that he not in default and that the Bank charged attorney’s fees to him. We appreciate the opportunity to respond. The loan documents expressly require that the customer keep the property free from all mechanics liens as stated in the Loan Agreement, Section 2, the Construction Loan Agreement & Assignment of Account, Section, 10.B, and the Deed of Trust, Section 4. A title report dated February 24, 2016, issued by the title company to the Bank showed at least two mechanic's liens recorded against the customer’s property. Additionally, the Bank’s loan documents expressly permit the Bank to obtain legal counsel to enforce the documents and charge reasonable fees to the customer as stated in the Loan Agreement Section 5, the Construction Loan Agreement Section 25 C, and in the Deed of Trust Section 14. The Bank appreciates the opportunity to respond and respectfully requests that the matter be closed. Sincerely, Monsy M[redacted] Compliance Officer & Interim Compliance Manager

March 17, 2017   Via Online Portal 1000 Station Dr., Ste. 222 DuPont, WA. 98327   RE: Complaint, #[redacted]   Dear Revdex.com:   The [redacted] originally responded to this complaint (“Complaint”) in its response (“Response”) posted to the Revdex.com’s website on March 15, 2017.   Respectfully, the [redacted] has already responded to this complaint and does not have any additional information to provide. If the consumer has any additional questions or concerns they are encouraged to contact the Client Care Center at 1-800-324-9375 or to stop by the nearest Washington Federal branch location. We appreciate the opportunity to respond and do request that the matter be closed.   Sincerely,     Brent R[redacted] Consumer Compliance Officer

July 15, 2016
 
Via Online Portal
P.O. Box 1000
DuPont, WA. 98327
 
RE: [redacted], Complaint #[redacted]
 
Dear Revdex.com:
 
This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal “the Bank”), from the...

Revdex.com (“Revdex.com”) on July 8, 2016. In the Complaint, [redacted] (“Ms. [redacted]”) alleges that for the past two years she has been receiving bills on a safe deposit box that was closed. We appreciate the opportunity to respond.
 
The branch where the safe deposit box (the “Box”) was located indicated that they never received the signed off contract from Ms. [redacted] and had tried to reach out to Ms. [redacted] but the telephone number on file was a non-working number. The Bank’s leadership closed the Box on July 8, 2016 and waived any fees that were showed as being due. The Bank did not report Ms. [redacted]’s Box to the credit bureaus. The Bank regrets any inconvenience that Ms. [redacted] may have experienced.
 
We appreciate the opportunity to respond and respectfully request that the matter be closed.
 
Sincerely,
 
 
Monsy M[redacted]
Vice President & Compliance Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I have had same account that required no monthly fee in the last upgrade you had 2-3 years ago you tried to change me over to a account with a monthly fee and before that I had a account with [redacted] as they transitioned over to Washington Federal.  My complaint is that you force upon clients a monthly fee instead of putting them in a account that you charge them a monthly fee (Green account) instead of putting them in the free (Basic account) with a opportunity to upgrade to other type of accounts.  You can look at my account I have NEVER with you or [redacted] wrote a check only so being limited to 25 checks a month was no problem for me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

July 29, 2016
 
Via Online Portal
P.O. Box 1000
DuPont, WA. 98327
 
RE: Complaint #[redacted]
 
Dear Revdex.com:
 
This is in response to the above mentioned complaint (“Compliant”) received by Washington Federal (“the Bank”), from the Better Business...

Bureau (“Revdex.com”) on July 20, 2016. In the Complaint, the consumer alleges that she went to ACU Credit Union and found out that the Bank incorrectly reported four late loan payments to the credit bureau. She further alleges that she called the Bank but did not receive a response. We appreciate the opportunity to respond.
 
The Bank researched and has verified that there were four late loan payments in the last 84 months; three in 2009 and one in 2014. The information regarding the late loan payments that the consumer alleges was incorrect, was in fact, correct.
 
The Bank complies with the Fair Credit Reporting Act which states that information reported to the credit bureaus must be reported accurately.
 
The Bank does respond to written inquiries regarding information incorrectly reported to the credit bureaus. The customer should include their name, address, the exact nature of the disputed information, and include any documentation, if applicable, with the inquiry. The Bank will investigate and respond within the timeframes prescribed by regulation.
 
We appreciate the opportunity to respond and respectfully request that the matter be closed.
 
Sincerely,
 
 
Brent R[redacted]
Consumer Compliance Officer