Consumer complaint received 2020-01-30
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: PA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage

Complaint:
Our complaint involves negligence by Merrill Lynch ( a wealth and investing division of Bank of America/BoA hereafter referred to as M/L ) in the loan approval process for a second home we purchased in Georgia. This negligence resulted in substantial financial harm to my husband and myself. In our loan application process with M/L, we provided the lending officer with all requested information in XX/XX/XXXX. In XX/XX/XXXX, we received both our interest rate lock-in agreement and mortgage loan commitment letter. On XX/XX/XXXX, one week before closing, we called our loan officer Mr. XXXX  to make sure everything was in order. We learned there was an issue with the loan, but he reassured us we still would be able to secure a mortgage. Later that same evening, we received an email from Mr. XXXX informing us that our loan had been denied. He emailed us instead of calling to tell us in person. Surprisingly, he included a whole email thread that included an internal BoA document indicating the loan had been denied on XX/XX/XXXX -- over a month before we were notified! 

Mr. XXXX informed us that the mortgage was declined due to the fact that the property rights were leasehold, not fee simple. However, the leasehold language was used in multiple documents in the application process including the Sales Agreement and Uniform Residential Appraisal Report. The type of ownership was disclosed upfront. Furthermore, as we have 780+ credit scores, our debt to income falls well below any threshold and family income in excess of $ 300k+, we were extremely eligible and worthy of the loan. The determining factor was the leasehold. In other words, Mr. XXXX clearly failed to perform his due diligence in reviewing all the relevant documents to be aware of the leasehold language. 

This was extremely disappointing due to the fact Mr. XXXX was a Vice President of Wealth Management at BoA in our M/L office ; and, therefore, our financial burden was the direct result of M/L 's negligence. We expected a higher level and standard of care. With only one week to closing and no mortgage, our financial position changed dramatically because we had to raise the funds quickly by selling stock ( some at a loss ) with large commission fees. Additionally, we lost the lower interest lock-in rate, future gains on stocks that we had intended to hold in our investment portfolio for years and we were required to pay higher capital gains taxes because of the forced stock sell-off.

Liquidating assets was not part of our plan. All of the stock came from an advance on an inheritance. Without that, we would have lost this second home as we had no alternative plan from the mortgage and the rates had increased higher than our comfort level. We had put a lot of heart and soul into customizing the interior of our new construction home. The emotional stress took its toll as we scrambled to deal with the situation M/Ls negligence had placed on the two of us. 

We sent a certified return receipt letter to XXXX XXXX, Director of M/L dated  XX/XX/XXXX and had hoped to outline the issues stated above, and in hopes we could reach some sort of amicable resolution to our complaint and compensation for our losses. M/L did not respond. It is now almost two years, and still no word. No email. No letter. Nothing. We are attaching copies of the certified letter, email correspondence with Mr. XXXX, documents from Mr. XXXX leading up to the closing, appraisal fee paid, an XXXX spreadsheet timeline, capital gains and commission fees from stock needed to sell for closing, and historical prices and values of the transferred stock from the inheritance showing the loss of current and future income from those assets. If we had been immediately notified as shown in the email thread of the BoA personnel, we would have taken a different course of action and not sold positions that resulted in us incurring unnecessary capital gains and loss of future investment gains.

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