Consumer complaint received 2017-03-05
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker

Complaint:
XX/XX/XXXX-Married XXXX couple ( CitiMortgage borrowers, since XX/XX/XXXX ) initiate refinance with CitiMortgage via telephone with goal ( s ) : Payoff existing loan, $ XXXX@4.25 % APR. Reduce APR. Reduce monthly payment. Utilize allowable reporting advantages tax year XX/XX/XXXX. 
XX/XX/XXXX-Per request/in response to initial phone conversation -in order to provide clarification regarding XXXX- borrowers forward copy of Annual County Property Tax Information Statement to Citi Mortgage Representative via email. Further, within email text, borrower points out specific location of XXXX ( XXXX ) as reflected on tax statement. 
Per real estate professionals consulted by borrower 's since, the presence of a " XXXX would be readily apparent '' during the Preliminary Title Review process - properly conducted - " to any real estate financing professional and or loan officer ''. 
XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, 300+ emails exchanged - most initiated by borrowers - between borrowers/Mortgage Representative/Personal Loan Processor** ( s ) / and XXXX. Borrowers providing - among other items - all requested/required documentation in support of refinance effort. This included formal XXXX Subordination document ( s ) to second position on title. 
Dozens of phone calls also exchanged during and after this period. 
On or about XXXX-Borrowers receive convivial phone call from CitiMortgage Personal Loan Processor**, seeking title related information and advising borrowers as to what to " expect '' going forward. 
XX/XX/XXXX-Loan Estimate $ XXXX@4.0 % and XXXX Points funded and conveyed. * XX/XX/XXXX-Following-up on additional documentation provided by borrowers, Citi Mortgage Representative : " So thank you very much for your prompt work on getting those to me. Loan Processor** also informed me that she is very familiar with the XXXX and has worked with them many times before. She informed me that she still needs to contact XXXX for some internal documents. This can take some time but we will keep you updated as we go through the process. '' On or about XX/XX/XXXX-Via telephone, Citi Mortgage Representative articulates that " I misspoke. Loan Processor** has actually never worked with XXXX before. '' The obvious : If Loan Processor** was " very familiar '' with XXXX and due diligence had been conducted in the first place, Loan Processor** certainly would have informed borrowers in XX/XX/XXXX Citi would not originate refinance with XXXX recorded on tile. A blatant lie coupled with an attempt to cover Citi 's tracks. 
XX/XX/XXXX-CitiMortgage informs borrowers Citi is " not able to originate a new loan '' XX/XX/XXXX-Borrowers contact Citi " Executive Response Team ''. 
XX/XX/XXXX-Updated Loan Estimate $ XXXX@4.0 % and XXXX Points funded and conveyed *. *In both of these scenarios, Loan Costs " Loan Amounts '' reflected " {$5200.00} '' which-when factored-is XXXX Points not XXXX Points which XXXX {$1000.00}. We received these egregious figures three different times-once via Next Day XXXX-Citi has remained silent on this issue. 
XX/XX/XXXX-Borrowers have repeatedly been told : " We must follow the lending guidelines enforced by our investors, as well as our credit policy. These guidelines dictate that we can not originate a new mortgage loan account on a property that has an active XXXX lien recorded on title. '' XX/XX/XXXX to present-Borrower repeatedly articulates, nowhere within CitiMortgage documentation is it disclosed-in a clear and conspicuous manner in writing-that Citi will not, or can not proceed assessment recorded on title. 
Borrowers find it inexcusable- bordering criminal -CitiMortgage took over two months to articulate their " guidelines '' forbade a XXXX on property, much less attempt to abscond with {$4200.00} of borrower cash.

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