Consumer complaint received 2019-09-28
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — 
Company: DHI Mortgage Company (VA)

Consumer Complaint against XXXX XXXX  ( NMLS # XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( NMLA # XXXX ) DHI Mortgage Company, LTD. NMLS # XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX, TX XXXX XXXX www.dhimortgage.com XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXe ( NMLA # XXXX ) DHI Mortgage NMLS # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( NMLA XXXX ) XXXX, GA XXXX XXXX This complaint alleges age bias in the processing of my mortgage loan application. 

I. Bias Against the Elderly : I am a gainfully employed senior citizen who applied for a mortgage loan to purchase a second home in another state. I applied to DHI Mortgage who was identified as the " preferred lender '' of the home builder in order to qualify for an array of incentives that were available to me as a home buyer. DHI Mortgage proceeded to harvest my personal financial information as part of the loan application process and I worked cooperatively with them to make sure that they had access to all and any related documents that were needed for the underwriting of my loan application. 

Around noon on XX/XX/XXXX, I received a call from XXXX XXXX, the Loan Originator to with whom I had been working from the initial start of the loan process. She told me that there was a problem with my loan application. She said that DHI Mortgage could not include any of my salary this year in calculating my qualifying income for the loan because I had said during the initial phone call that I was planning to retire in about a year. I responded, Well, I do not have to retire! I explained that I had not even applied for retirement nor shared any retirement intent with Human Resources on my job. I explained that I had already signed my contract for the XXXX XXXX, and that I was a XXXX  XXXX   able to work as long as I was capable of performing my job. No one was making me retire. Further, people talk about retiring and change their minds all the time if circumstances change or they just decide to change their minds. Her response was, You cant go back! I asked, Go back on what? She continued to go on about how my income would change when I retired and I would fall short of the income threshold needed for the loan. I reminded her that whenever I did retire, I would still have XXXX   Retirement income, which I could document and whose documented amount she requested. 

XXXX kept trying to explain that DHI Mortgage could not count future income, but only current income, which seemed contradictory since she kept saying that my current contracted income would not count. She said DHI Mortgage required that I be on a job at least three years ( never heard of that before!!! ). Not only did that strike me as bizarre, I also recalled from my review of the loan paperwork that XXXX   XXXX would be selling my loan to someone else before I even made the first payment!! So the idea that they needed a three-year stream of income to guarantee a loan that they would sell before my first payment seemed strange. Further, given the industrys insistence that consumers be forced to pay PMI to protect the lenders financial interests against future financial uncertainties associated with a mortgage loan they make, why would a three-year future income benchmark be privileged over a strong credit history, stable employment history, and current income? After all, no one can predict the future, for NOTHING in life is guaranteed three years in the future for anyonethe very premise upon which any kind of insurance operates. I began to feel that disqualifying criteria were being manufactured as we spoke to fit conclusions that had already been made. XXXX insisted that the solution was for me to start taking a distribution from my IRA now, an idea that I rejected because of the unnecessary tax liability it would present for me. Further, pressuring me to start disbursements from my IRA after I have strongly objected to the unnecessary tax liability that I would incur is reprehensible and highly unprofessional for a loan officer. 

That conversation ended with XXXX stating that she would talk again to the loan processors and get back to me. However, it should be noted that I was never offered an opportunity to speak to the underwriters on my own behalf and offer any firsthand information about my finances that would assist them in making a decision about my financial stability. There also seemed to be no interest in verifying with my employer ( 1 ) whether actual retirement plans had been established with my employer or ( 2 ) what my VA retirement income would be in the coming three years IF I actually did retire. As I stated, seniors talk about retirement many times before actually doing it. 

After allegedly checking with the mortgage team or someone else, XXXX called my agent and me later that afternoon and informed us via conference call that my loan application was being denied because of a discontinuation of income. I asked her what documentation DHI Mortgage had to substantiate such a conclusion. I could get no answer. Unlike other information that had required extensive documentation and verification of my financial information, this decision seemed to be based on no more than a loan originators perception of what retirement is for senior citizens or a desire to impose individual qualifying criteria on a loan applicant at retirement age. 

Thus, the denial of my loan application is an unfair and discriminatory action based on biased, negative perceptions of elderly consumers rather than on an objective assessment of my individual creditworthiness. 
1. First, there appears to be a presumption of what retirement is and a preconceived notion of what elderly do when they retire. My colleagues who retire frequently join or start consulting or other businesses, continue their professional employment in other states, or work part time on jobs related to their profession ( ex. teaching online ) or they may build ventures around their avocations. At no time did XXXX ask me anything about what my retirement plans might be if I left the XXXXwhether I would take another job after relocating to Georgia, pursue a business venture, seek any other sources of income, etc. Nothing! The alleged and presumed discontinuation of income is no more than an age-related stereotype, a preconceived image of retirement assigned to me merely because I spoke of retiring in conjunction with buying a second homea decision that those with the financial means to do so routinely make every day without being subjected to the age bias that is evident in this case. I believe that I am being discriminated against as a consumer at retirement age. My loan denial appears based on a perception about a future prospect of retirement and not on any documented evidence of future retirement as a fait accompli and its associated reduction in income. By not providing me access to the underwriters to discuss this issue and by making a decision that privileged hearsay over documented factual evidence of creditworthiness and financial stability solicited from me, XXXX XXXX appears to endorse XXXX bias about loan applicants at retirement age. 

2. DHI Mortgages preapproval letter made it clear that it would undertake an effort to verify the personal financial information that I initially gave them and seek resolution of any facts particular to the Borrowers financial information to determine that I meet the Lenders underwriting criteria ( Preapproval letter dated XX/XX/XXXX ). Rather than taking those steps as indicated in the letter, DHI Mortgage acted counter to that described action. While it was a fact that I verbally expressed an intent to retire in about a year, actual impending retirement was never a DOCUMENTED or VERIFIED FACT. Nor was there ever any DOCUMENTED or VERIFIED FACT of a related DISCONTIUATION OF INCOME that grew out of a casually verbalized intent during a telephone conversation whose context was never ascertained by hearing both sides of the conversation. 

Had XXXX XXXX been guided by an effort to verify an individuals information rather than simply speedily retreat to a PERCEPTION of an individual based on age, the loan processors could have easily asked for contact information for the XXXX Retirement System or the XXXX  Benefits Counselor in order to confirm whether or not a pending retirement was a FACT as well as WHEN and HOW much any change in my income would occur as a result. Instead, XXXX neither pursued any facts much less their resolution regarding this solitary reason for declining my loan application, a reason that was given weight over all the solid documented evidence of my qualifying credit worthiness ( an excellent credit score, a 1 % credit card utilization, a 6-figure salary, low DTI ratios based on past and current salary, liquid assets that exceeded the value of the loan, and 17-year job history ). 

XXXX protestation that DHI Mortgage requires three years of FUTURE income is what needs to be substantiated as factperhaps through class action litigation ; I see that argument as no more than a specious attempt to keep an otherwise financially qualified senior citizen from getting a mortgage loan. I was left with the strong sentiment that there was a hidden agenda at work here that had little to do with criteria for approval for a mortgage loan. As communicated to my real estate agent and by a voice message that I received from one of XXXX supervising officers at the company, DHI Mortgages remedy is for me to accept their referral to someone else to underwrite my mortgage loan, specifically to participate in their DHI Mortgage Home Buyers Club, an outfit that works with home buyers with credit  challenges ( and buyers who no doubt pay greater interest rates to lenders to get a mortgage! ). 

II. A loan Practice That Unfairly Disadvantages Senior Consumers : On XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from DHI Mortgage officially denying my application for a loan. My credit status led them to conclude that I supposedly have excessive obligations, though all three bureaus reported excellent credit ratings and a credit utilization of only 1-2 percent. Further, my income was ruled insufficient, apparently as a result of the loan processors adamant refusal to include my entire current six-figure contracted salary ( XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX ) in the calculation of my DTI ratios. By NOT reporting and not including my current income, the loan processor knowingly misrepresented my qualifying income simply because I rejected her urging to start taking disbursements from an annuityfuture supplementary income for which I have NO current financial need in order to manage repayment of the requested mortgage loan. 

When I challenged this denial, DHI Mortgage stood by the decisions of their underwriters, telling me that At the time of application, you indicated to the Mortgage Loan Originator that the subject property would be your second home as you intended to retire next year and move to Georgia. Since you plan to retire, your current employment income is not likely to continue for the next three years and, therefore, could not be used as qualifying income ( Email from XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ). What is discriminatory here is that this appears to be an artfully constructed Catch-22 applied only to senior consumers. Seniors approaching retirement age routinely get annual statements that project their future retirement monthly income should they elect to retire at a certain age or date. For DHI Mortgage to refuse to permit this future income in their calculation of a senior consumers three-year projection of income because it is FUTURE rather than CURRENT income is patently unfair and discriminatory. DHI Mortgage is unfairly dismissing the senior consumers CURRENT annual income, zeroing it out for three years and refusing to put in its place the verifiable retirement income projection guaranteed ( earned and vested ) for those years. Meanwhile, younger consumers get the benefit of a creditable future income stream based on the existing current annual income and the mere PRESUMPTION ONLY of a future income based on nothing. This practice of imposing a disqualifying ABSENCE of current income on a senior loan applicant at retirement age who is gainfully employed full time while giving younger consumers similarly gainfully employed credit for the PRESENCE of income is clearly a violation of my consumer rights against age discrimination and is an underwriting tactic that is patently unfair to senior consumers and senior mortgage loan applicants. 

Conclusion As outlined above, the denial of my loan application is not based on equitably evaluated documented facts as promised but rather on hearsay and personal perceptions of senior citizens. The servicing of my loan application by DHI Mortgage has been handled unfairly, and I appeal to XXXX XXXX  to cease and desist this discriminatory practice. I also appeal to all agencies and governing bodies that exist to protect the rights of all citizens to fair and transparent credit practices to demand from XXXX  XXXX  immediate compliance with the law. My understanding is that the mortgage underwriting process is to review evidence of an applicants credit and financial information and determine from documented evidence that we meet the lenders criteria for a loan. The dismissal and immediate discounting of a senior consumers current annual income merely because of conversations of retirement ( rather than a documented review of verifiable retirement income ) is no more than a contrived barrier erected to bar a retirement-age consumer from the financial access that other consumers freely have. I further encourage XXXX XXXX to take steps to sensitize its loan officers to the disparaging perceptions of elderly consumers. The practice of creating for us roadblocks that do not exist for other applicants only leaves us questioning the companys integrity as a lending institution. 

Thank you.