Consumer complaint received 2022-12-01
Company: Mortgage Research Center, LLC
State: MD
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: VA mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage

Complaint:
During our lending process with Veterans United we were intentionally misled and deceived with bait and switch tactics which resulted in an interest rate of almost double what was initially discussed with the lender. These intentional tactics misled us about the costs of goods and services being provided by the lender in such a manner that we were unable to reasonably avoid financial impact/injury without agreeing to the inflated terms and conditions of the final disclosure. 
We began the mortgage lending process with Veterans United on XX/XX/2022, at an unlocked rate offer of 2.99 %. At this time, we were shopping mortgages with multiple companies for the best fit for our needs, to include closing costs, money down, interest rates, points, etc. After receiving a follow up loan estimate from Veterans United on XXXX XXXX that still showed the same 2.99 %, despite the market increases that had occurred in XXXX, I reached out to our Loan Officer, XXXX XXXX, via phone to ask about the information. During this call I again advised we were still considering multiple lenders but that the lower interest rate reflected in this estimate would significantly sway our decision in favor of Veterans United, as it was considerably lower than the current rate lock offer from the competition. XXXX reiterated we did not have a rate lock in place with Veterans United, which I acknowledged, however, he stated we would receive the final interest rate closer to closing, and that would reflect the correct information. He also requested I send him the comp offers we currently had locked ( reflecting a rate of 4.875 % ) as well as the current closing cost offers from the builders preferred lender so he could evaluate them, which I provided. 
On XX/XX/2022, we were notified by the builder that our closing had been tentatively scheduled for a XX/XX/XXXX date, which was confirmed a few days later. We provided Veterans United with this information and received our follow up loan estimate on XX/XX/2022. This document continued to reflect an interest rate of 2.99 % on a loan of {$510000.00} for an estimated total monthly payment amount ( including principal, interest, and escrow ) of {$3000.00}. Based on the previous conversation with our loan officer that advised our final rate would be sent prior to closing and the low mortgage payment amount, we decided that this was the best lending option for our family, and we would not be proceeding with any competing offers from other lenders. At this time, if we had been provided with deceptive information we could have reasonably continued to pursue other lender offers and potentially close on time, avoiding any additional financial impact/injury for associated hold over costs or higher mortgage payment amounts. 
Only XXXX days later, we were supplied with our RESPA required Initial Closing XXXX, with only XXXX business days before our closing date. We were understandably shocked and appalled at the changes made during that XXXX week period, which increased our rate to 5.625 % on the same loan amount, thereby significantly impacting our monthly payment amount to an increased sum of {$3800.00}. 
While we had expected to see the 2.99 % rise in line with industry and market standards we were misled through unfair and deceptive acts and practice by this lender until such a time as we were XXXX XXXXXXXX to continue to secure our loan with them, since the builder contract contained a hold over close where we would be financially liable at a large daily rate, if our loan was not completed by our settlement date of XX/XX/XXXX. The difference in payments from the original estimates to the final disclosure total {$790.00} per month, {$9500.00} annually, and a staggering {$280000.00} over the life of our loan. 
After speaking to someone at the CFPB and being advised that even if we submitted a complaint, the process time allotted to Veterans United for response would exceed the amount of time we had to avoid additional financial injury from the builder I was astonished that we were in this situation. We immediately reached out to our loan officer to discuss the large discrepancy between the documents we received on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/2022. When he responded to us his words were that he was afraid this would happen after he spoke with me in XXXX and thats why he pointed out we didnt have a rate lock. When pressed for addition comment on his statement that the next document we received would be closer to closing and contain accurate information, he brushed the incorrect rates off as a mistake. I explained that this was a clear violation of XXXX, and I was shocked that any company associated with serving the veteran community would ever consider engaging in such practices. Additionally, we stated that even with the interest rate hike from the federal reserve, the currently offered rate was not in line with our credit scores and what other lenders had been showing, so not only was this almost double what we expected, but also high compared to the current fair market valuation based on additional factors. 
At this time XXXX advised that due to the confusion he would reach out to management to see if there was anything they could do to apologize for the confusion. He then advised that Veterans United was prepared to offer XXXX {$1500.00} additional lender credits towards our closing costs because of this issue. We explained that due to the misrepresentation of our rates by Veterans United at the time we would have been able to reasonably avoid financial injury we were now basically held XXXX to accept this additional lending credit amount, despite the benefit not outweighing our injury. 
As consumers, we expected to see a rate increase on our loan due to the market changes experienced over the first half of the year, however, what we did not expect to see was continuous misrepresentation on official documentation that intentionally deceives consumers, especially those in a protected XXXX XXXX, and XXXX in a protected XXXX status. The act of sending us a misleading loan estimate 8 days before providing the closing disclosure statement was an intentional effort on the part of Veterans United to deceive us until a point at which we had no other option but to proceed with whatever loan terms they offered. Unfortunately, I am not hopeful there is any reparation available to us at this time, but I sincerely hope that Veterans United will be held accountable for their actions and be required to change their policies to avoid these bait and switch tactics in the future.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation