Consumer complaint received 2018-06-20
Company: BMO HARRIS BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: PA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage

Complaint:
BMO Harris failed to disclose all the requirements of their XXXX   mortgage program during the application and pre-approval stages and continued to misrepresent our options and solutions during processing and underwriting resulting in delay in closing and failure to perform. 

We began initial discussions with mortgage banker XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX and were pre-approved prior to going under contract for a home on XX/XX/XXXX. The status of our employment ( starting new jobs in a new state ) was made clear to both XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ( new loan officer who took over our account from XXXX XXXX ). We were never told that the contingencies contained within our offers letters and contracts, which were provided during this phase, would be required to be met prior to closing. As is standard in XXXX contracts, we had contingencies including state licensure, XXXX  credentialing, as well as other employer specific requirements. While we had been working to meet these contingencies, including by having submitted all documentation required on our behalf, the remainder of the contingencies could not be met until governing boards had completed their process. If we had been properly informed of the mortgage program requirements, we would not have staked the closing of our house on these contingencies which were out of our control. We were first made aware of these requirements when we received our conditional loan approval on XX/XX/XXXX. We contacted our processor and submitted letters from our future employers ' HR departments stating that we had completed our portion of these contingencies and we were on track to starting on our anticipated start dates. After submission of this documentation we were unable to get answers from BMO employees in either processing or loan officers on where the status of our loan stood. In fact, our loan officers did not return several calls and emails until we contacted his supervisor XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. At that time we were told that they were working with underwriting where it had been escalated to the level of the U.S. director of underwriting. XXXX XXXX told us that the decision was made to allow a verbal verification of our future employment in lieu of meeting contingencies for both of us. He told us that he was 95 % certain that it would go through and if we were able to get our processor in contact with our employers that it would not be a concern. We helped to facilitate the contact with our future employers with our loan processor. I remained in contact with our processor every few days to ensure they did not need any further documentation and that everything was on track for our closing date of XX/XX/XXXX. I received multiple reassurances that indeed they had all documentation and that the decision made by the head of underwriting could not be overruled. As of XX/XX/XXXX this continued to be the message. When I called again on XX/XX/XXXX, I was unable to reach the processor despite multiple attempts. I called multiple times again on XX/XX/XXXX as we should have been receiving our closing disclosure and was unable to get a return call or email from either the processor or loan officer. We again escalated this to XXXX XXXX who text us that evening that there were problems with the contingencies but he could not discuss them with us at that time and that we needed to call the processing supervisor XXXX XXXX. As it was after business hours we called, left a voicemail and emailed but could not get in contact until the morning of XX/XX/XXXX when we were told that we would not be closing on time. We worked with XXXX over the next several days to attempt to get documentation from our future employers as we were then told we could close by XX/XX/XXXX. I reviewed the remaining steps and timeline required for closing with XXXX however this process changed as time went along and despite meeting certain approvals would then require additional documentation and start the approval process over. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX stopped returning my calls. That night after business hours I received a call from XXXX XXXX that they would not close our mortgage until our XXXX credentialing had been complete ( which would be later than XX/XX/XXXX ). 

Had they been clear from the start or even at the point that we raised questions about these requirements we would have had adequate time to find another lender who understood XXXX contracts and employment. In addition to their misrepresentation of their program, their customer service was deplorable. Not only did they not answer or return calls and emails but we were spoken to with such disrespect. We provided all requested documentation promptly and gave them extra time beyond the contracted closing date in order to close this loan. Their actions were not of a bank trying to earn our business, but instead trying to prevent us from using another lender.

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 monetary relief