Consumer complaint received 2023-05-06
Company: PRIORITY HOME MORTGAGE, L.P.
State: TX
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage

Complaint:
This pertains to the issue regarding the request for a refund of the rate lockdown payment that was made on XX/XX/XXXX. 
Once we received your response dated XX/XX/XXXX ( attached ), we had to seek legal counsel which we have done. We are writing to you in a final attempt to resolve this matter before we pursue the legal remedies available to us. 
Your mortgage originator will recall that we approached your company following a referral by the Sales Representative at XXXX XXXX, who is the builder of the home we were looking to purchase. We had already obtained a mortgage approval with XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( They handled the refinancing of our first home ). At the Builders behest, we were directed to you in order to obtain a conventional mortgage under the pretext that we would in fact get discounts arising out of your relationship/ arrangement with the builder i.e. you are the builders preferred lender. We obtained a conditional approval from Priority Home Mortgage LP on XX/XX/XXXX. It is not correct that the mortgage originator explained or disclosed the non-refundable aspect of the product that was offered to me after the conditional approval. We have attached email communication with XXXX XXXX, and nowhere does she mention that the rate lock payment is non-refundable. Even if she is said to have explained it, we certainly did not agree to not obtaining a refund in the event that the mortgage agreement did not materialise. It is industry practice that a waiver of rights must be made in writing and after full disclosure of all material information. It ought to be a deliberate and informed exercise, and in this case, we were not informed of the non-refundable at the time of payment. 
The document that summarises that which was disclosed to us is the invoice of XX/XX/XXXX. As you will note the invoice which was settled immediately does not disclose that the fee would be non-refundable should the parties not enter into an agreement. It is also silent on any terms and conditions that may be attached to the payment, neither does it refer us to even a website where these terms may have been gleaned from. The condition which purportedly reads as a general condition does not appear even on your website under the product in question. It stands to reason that every effort was made to conceal this term and or condition of the contract before the agreement was made. 
The XXXX XXXX XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX ( four days after you had received payment ) does not refer to payments already made. It refers to payments to be made after the contract is signed. Demonstrably there can not be said to have been a meeting of minds at the time we made the payment. You therefore can not mischievously seek to import terms that were not disclosed at the time the payment was made. 
In addition, the XXXX XXXX XXXX was only signed by one borrower on XX/XX/XXXX of XXXX, and then later signed by the second borrower on XX/XX/XXXX. The said contract was not fully executed by both borrowers until 3 months after the receipt of payment. Therefore, the validity of the said contract is ambiguous. When the property we intended to purchase was appraised, its value was below the market value and its price did not match the appraised value. The conditional approval was for a loan of {$470000.00}, for a property whose value would be appraised not be less than {$600000.00}. The appraised value came at {$570000.00}. Even with the concessions made by the builder, the appraisal obtained was not in line with the conditional approval. In the circumstances we could not persist in concluding a contract below the agreed conditions notwithstanding the collusive arrangement between yourselves and the builder. In the circumstances, we require a refund of the amount paid to you being {$5000.00} immediately and not later than 30 days from receipt of this letter. Failing which we shall pursue for a refund through the courts, the cost of same being for your account. 
Should there be an additional forum we can approach for the resolution of this impasse kindly advise me of same in your response in order for us to make the approach. We trust that same will however not be necessary.

Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief