Consumer complaint received 12-02-2016 about Mortgage (Conventional fixed mortgage) with CARDINAL FINANCIAL COMPANY (MD).
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker

Complaint: My wife and I initiated a mortgage application with Sebonic Financial and its affiliate Cardinal Financial on XXXX XXXX, 2016 to refinance the mortgage on our property located in XXXX XXXX Maryland. The mortgage officer, XXXX XXXX locked the rate at 3.75 % fixed rate for 30 years and promised us a smooth and fast processing in one month and promised no more than {$800.00} out of pocket expense. 

Following are the reasons for our application withdrawal on XXXX XXXX, 2016 and our request for refund of the money that we had already paid to the company ( {$600.00} + {$180.00} ) for appraisal and condo questionnaire : 1. The initial disclosure dated XXXX XXXX, 2016 ( please see the attached disclosure ) specified the closing cost to be {$5700.00}. The latest disclosure dated XXXX XXXX, 2016 changed the closing cost to {$6600.00}. An unexpected increase of {$930.00} in our out of pocket expenses. ( Please see the attached email from mortgage officer on XXXX XXXX, 2016 ). 
2. The correspondence from the company that we need to pay 0.125 % extra to keep the rate at the 3.75 % promised on XXXX XXXX would have incurred an additional out of pocket expense of {$930.00}. XXXX the hour after application withdrawal, the mortgage officer reversed the company position and said " we will honor what was promised. '' They had already broken their promises and we did not want to take another risk with them. ( Please see the email from Cardinal Financial on XXXX XXXX ). 
3. According to federal and local rules and regulations, the appraisal done should have been given to us within 7 days after it was completed. The appraisal was done on XXXX XXXX and the appraiser in a text message told me that he sent it to the company. Cardinal Financial sent us the appraisal on the date that we withdrew our application and without any proof claim that they have sent it earlier and would perhaps gone to our junk folder. ( Please see the email dated XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX ). 
4. Cardinal financial processors were not acting professionally to complete the process in a timely fashion and with accuracy. For example, it is customary in this business to ensure that the renters to owner occupancy ratio is within the XXXX guideline of 50 % before ordering the appraisal. Cardinal Financial processing team was not aware of this requirement. Moreover, they the apartment number was wrong apartment number ( please see the attached file ) and sent the condo questionnaire to investigate this ratio erroneously to the wrong building and I had to interfere personally to fix the problem. ( Please see my email dated XXXX XXXX and the response by XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX ). 
5. My wife and I submitted all the required documents requested by Cardinal Financial in less than a week after application submission ( XXXX XXXX ). Three weeks later, the Cardinal Financial was still dragging their feet and have not even submitted the loan to the underwriter and were in no position to close the loan XXXX XXXX as promised. Therefore, we did not cause any delay in the process and we are entitled to a refund of our expensed regardless of who has charged our credit cards. They should pay for their mismanagement and are responsible for payment to their third parties not us. 
6. Seven days after we withdrew our application, the company notified us that our file has been moved to a new processor, which is another proof of mishandling of our file by the original processor. It is also another proof of company 's mismanagement because apparently some part of the company were not still aware of our withdrawal 7 days earlier. 
XXXX. After we withdrew our application we applied with another mortgage company on the same day and even though they charged us a higher rate, but closed the loan in less than 25 days from the date of application as they promised. I can provide you with the proof

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation