We applied on XXXX XXXX, 2015 and eventually closed a HARP refinance with First Mortgage Company of Idaho on XXXX XXXX, 2015. There were a number of issues with the entire process that began from the start ( i.e., rate lock without authorization ) and have continued following closing ( i.e., understated loan payoff, overstated XXXX payment ). 
1. Rate Lock - The rate was locked by the loan officer without our authorization at 4.125 %. This would have been ideal had the loan actually closed prior to lock expiration. The loan officer committed to absorbing the cost of a rate lock extension should it be needed. 
2. XXXX Mortgage Subordination - We have a XXXX mortgage that is serviced by XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX required an appraisal or AVM to substantiate the value of the property. Note : XXXX did not require either to refinance the XXXX. In an attempt to save costs, the loan officer attempted to rely upon a real estate broker opinion to suffice as a AVM. XXXX XXXX rejected what was provided on a number of occasions. We used our contacts within the mortgage industry and provided the loan officer with a number of AVMs that were provided within minutes. These, along with another updated broker opinion, were ultimately provided to XXXX XXXX and accepted. It is unclear which was accepted. Regardless, the time it took for XXXX XXXX to approve the subordination request caused the interest rate lock extension fees to substantially increase. This issue was compounded by the utter lack of timely customer service offered by XXXX XXXX. Repeated phone calls by us to their customer service team expressing our frustration did not result in commitments to return phone calls. Note : The subordination team only communicates via XXXX and facsimile. If we were past due, we would surely have an account specialist assigned to us. 
3. Loan Closing - The loan file closed. However, our interest rate increased to 4.375 % from the initial lock of 4.125 %. The costs to extend far exceeded the benefit. First Mortgage absorbed some of the costs. Their argument was the delay was outside of their control ; the delay was caused by XXXX XXXX. We trusted First Mortgage and the title company ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) to ensure the accuracy of the information. 
4. Loan Payoff - The purpose of this loan was to refinance a loan serviced by XXXX. This should mean that the new loan amount is sufficient to pay the existing loan in full. Unfortunately, the payoff quote by XXXX did not accurately state the amount needed to payoff. The summary information that was clear and conspicuous ( at the top ) did not agree with the detail interest per diem at the bottom of the page. The closing parties relied upon the summary at the top of the page and did not reconcile. We informed the parties following the expiration of the rescission period. Unfortunately, we had to come up with an additional {$450.00}. We provided this amount on XXXX XXXX, 2015, to close the loan. Fortunately, we had adequate funds in savings. 
5. Verbal Complaint - We contacted the Idaho Department of Finance to voice our frustrations with the incorrect payoff. Was provided with contact information for XXXX XXXX. We had a conversation on XXXX XXXX, 2015 where we emphasized the TIL was understated since the new loan amount did not satisfy the existing mortgage. Ultimately, XXXX XXXX committed to reimbursing us for the amount we had to pay out of pocket. As of XXXX XXXX, 2015, we have yet to receive this check. An email was sent to XXXX with no response yet. We may have used an incorrect email address. 
6. First Mortgage Statement -- The first periodic mortgage statement stated a payment amount that exceeded the loan closing documents. The payment amount was overstated by {$50.00}. This was fixed ; however, no email or phone call from First Mortgage confirming the correction. 
We have ran out of characters to explain further.