|
On XX/XX/2021 a mortgage application was completed with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, a mortgage lender, for a property located in XXXX, NJ ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NJ XXXX ). All underwriting conditions were completed within the same business day of the request. The lender made the initial guarantee to close in XXXX. The lender then requested the appraisal company take photos and appraise the comparable properties despite having no authority to trespass onto other properties nor the relevant to the mortgage application for the property. An appeal was made from our attorney as the condition is not relevant given the appraisal amount for the property in question far exceeding the XXXX amount and the property noted in good condition as per appraisal and inspection. Further, the mortgage lender waited until the date of the lock expiration to " find '' another condition as an excuse to charge more closing costs for the purchase. The mortgage broker ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX ) handled business with the male applicant, and only would communicate the same information to the female applicant if directly requested by the male applicant as clear form a discrimination. The company is now requesting business records for any company with which either applicant is involved for the last three years despite business income not claimed as part of the transaction and K-1 forms already provided. Both applicants DTI, income, and credit far exceed the minimum requirement for this and any lender yet are met with poor communication, interrogations, and never ending unreasonable requests. The lender misrepresented and misled the borrowers about their ability to obtain a mortgage with the company, dragging the process out more than 45 days and preventing the borrowers from finding another mortgage company and costing the borrowers undue hardship for time, cost ( appraisal, inspection, lawyer ).
|