Consumer complaint received 2017-01-30
Company: NATIONS LENDING CORPORATION
State: DE
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker

Complaint:
I 'm writing to address an assortment of questionable issues I am presently experiencing with Nations Lending Corporation ( NL ). Our original closing date was set for XX/XX/XXXX, but was later moved forward to XX/XX/XXXX because they approved me sooner. On XX/XX/XXXX it was brought to my attention that they required additional pay stubs to verify my income, as my reflected hours posed a potential problem. Although I could have submitted my time card XX/XX/XXXX confirming 40hr, they required a pay stub. Because I am paid biweekly, I had to wait until XX/XX/XXXX to submit. I was finally informed on the afternoon of XX/XX/XXXX that I was approved ( again ) & closing would take place on XX/XX/XXXX. At XXXX that same day, I received an email from the processor requesting that I submit my XX/XX/XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX tax returns ( I had offered to send these in a month prior thinking they might be required but informed otherwise ), as there was " an oversight on { the } original review and needs to be addressed per audit. '' I emailed both returns later that night. Hoping for a quick response given that we were still planning to close on Fri ( the branch manager insisted that the audit department usually only takes a few hours to turn the file in and that there was no reason to believe closing would not occur as scheduled ), it was not until XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX that I was finally made aware that closing was not going to occur as the file was still not cleared with underwriting. I found this out while I was on the phone with my attorney who had been trying to get answers from NL all week regarding the closing. She had contacted me to see if I had heard anything & during that call the processor finally responded to the attorney 's email. Later that afternoon, my broker informed me I was approved & they were " shooting '' for a Monday closing. When I asked if we could close first thing Mon morning, he explained they do not like to schedule closings in the morning since the Federal Reserve does not release the funds until later in the day and therefore the agents do not get their commission. I was also informed by my broker during this line of communication that he had found a home insurance policy that was half the premium of my XXXX plan. He emailed the plan and told me to sign, so that they could get it back to underwriting. I could n't understand his intentions, but researched the plan anyway, which turns out to be significantly less coverage and only {$40.00} a month difference. I started questioning him as to what he was trying to achieve and ultimately learned that the XXXX premium back ratio could n't exceed XXXX % of my gross income, and the higher premium was pushing over the XXXX %. My XXXX policy was submitted to NL on XX/XX/XXXX. It is clear this is yet another oversight made on their end that should have been brought to my attention sooner and not on the day a closing was scheduled to occur. I later learned that the approval I had received from the broker was based on the insurance plan they had selected and tried to have me agree to without first explaining the matter. On a side note, the company they selected receives a XXXX rating out of XXXX. Although I will be contacting my XXXX agent to see about adjusting the premium, I am growing more and more frustrated with NL and really questioning their suspicious, misleading practices. My family and I have been significantly burdened financially and emotionally as a result of NL 's repeated failure to effectively communicate and inability to ensure their work is carried out properly. I am hoping to close by this coming Wednesday given our rate extension expires on XX/XX/XXXX, but I have very little confidence that what needs to be accomplished on their end will be completed by then.

Company public response: Company believes the complaint is the result of a misunderstanding
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation