Consumer complaint received 2015-03-27
Company: BANCO POPULAR DE PUERTO RICO
State: KS
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker

Complaint:
MORTGAGE COMPLAIN FILED BY : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX TELEPHONE : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX TELEPHONE : XXXX : Approximately around XXXX XXXX, my wife XXXX and I, XXXX XXXX, applied for a re-finance loan with Popular Mortgage, a subsidiary of Banco Popular of Puerto Rico. This subsidiary currently manages the mortgage which we are currently holding for the house. Everything seemed to be going well ; we completed all the paperwork and paid the application fee of {$570.00}. Time began to pass and we lost all communication with Popular Mortgage. I sent multiple e-mails inquiring about the loan and only got half answers. Finally in XXXX XXXX, Popular Mortgage informed us that they were denying us the re-finance loan because of a " wording '' issue with the title. They argued that XXXX single word in the tittle invalidated the tittle, thus they were not obligated to complete the re-financing action. 
BACKGROUND INFORMATION : The property in question is located in XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, kilometer XXXX, sector XXXX. The house was purchased in XXXX and financed through Popular Mortgage. We have been paying this mortgage for 10 years and not once have we missed a single payment, thus we are in good standing with the bank. Our credit rating is outstanding, and our debt to income ratio is low. Thus, there are no legal justifications that would preclude us from qualifying for the new loan. As a matter of fact, my wife and I just completed a re-finance loan for our current residence on XXXX XXXX, XXXX with XXXX XXXX Bank for the amount of {$280000.00}. 
The house was sold by XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX. The house was built in XXXX and it included a total of XXXX square meters. Prior to the construction, XXXX XXXX divided the land into XXXX plots : XXXX of XXXX square meters for the main house and XXXX for XXXX square meters that was given to the architect that drew the construction plans for the house. The XXXX, district of XXXX, XXXX XXXX approved the division of land on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. On XXXX XXXX XXXX, my wife and I hired a land investigator that reviewed the records in the XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, XXXX XXXX and confirmed that the request for division of land had been submitted officially as follow : VOLUME : XXXX CHAPTER : XXXX TOWN : XXXX PROPERTY : XXXX INSCRIPTION : XXXX page XXXX of the purchase agreement title, the notary wrote the following statement : " All individuals involved in this land purchase understand that the registry of this land and its current status are in good standing with the law and that under his best knowledge ( notary ) this land title study reflects the current status of the title ownership. " Popular Mortgage stated on e-mail dated XXXX XXXX XXXX that the registry of the land in which the house was built did not comply with the statutes established by XXXX ( XXXX of XXXX ) and that the " XXXX XXXX '' statute has not been met. This argument is irrelevant to the re-finance action, since it refers to a directive to annex the plot of XXXX square meters to the plot of land annexed to it. The plot of land in which the house rests ( XXXX square meters ) is registered legally in XXXX as verified by XXXX XXXX XXXX, title investigator, who was hired by both my wife and I to verify the land registration in question. 
BOTTOM LINE:1. Popular Mortgage agreed to finance the purchase of the house in question in XXXX with the SAME documentation ( titles, notaries, etc. ) that they now argued to be invalid. 
2. Under XXXX XXXX law, it is the lender ( bank ) who 's responsible to ensure that the title is in good standing ; not the buyers. 
3. If

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation