Consumer complaint received 2025-11-12 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Changes in loan terms during the application process
Company: LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC
State: MA

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/year>, we began the process of pursuing an FHA XXXX XXXX with our current mortgage lender, Lakeview. From the outset, we received fragmented, inconsistent, and misleading information from our loan officer and underwriting team, which has significantly impeded our ability to benefit from the lower mortgage rates available under FHA guidelines. 

On XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, we were quoted an initial rate of 5.75 %, a loan amount of {$400000.00}, and estimated closing costs of {$9000.00}, with an estimated cash-to-close amount of {$3200.00}. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, we were informed that our loan had progressed into underwriting. The communication we received from Lakeview included the following preliminary timeline : * Documents due : XX/XX/year> * Rate lock expiration : XX/XX/year>XXXX XXXX  Estimated closing date : XX/XX/scrub> XXXX XXXX  Funding date : XX/XX/year> The same email also stated that we should continue to pay your mortgage be current on payments until your existing loan is paid off after loan funding. 

We sought clarification because our loan originator had previously informed us that we could skip our XXXX payment, as those funds would be needed for closing costs and had been accounted for in the initial loan figures. Importantly, at this point, we were not delinquent or past due on our mortgage. 

The underwriter later advised that the XXXX payment was required to proceed, and that they would adjust the loan numbers accordingly. However, at no time did anyone indicate that an XXXX payment would also be required to meet a closing deadline of XX/XX/XXXX. 

This omission is critical. We made the XXXX payment in good faith to keep the process moving. On XX/XX/XXXX, we received an updated quote showing a cash-to-close amount of {$3100.00} or less. 

With only 19 days remaining before an undisclosed XX/XX/XXXX deadline, we received new disclosures on XX/XX/XXXX, showing a higher loan amount of {$400000.00} ( still at 5.75 % ) but a lower cash-to-close of {$2200.00}. 

From XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, we received no communication or updates from Lakeview until we reached out directly. The underwriter then requested additional documents to verify our marriage and my name, stating that upon receipt, we would be ready for final approval. We were also told we would need to bring the XXXX mortgage payment to closing, estimated at {$2000.00}. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, we requested an update on the closing status. On XX/XX/XXXX, we received a new disclosure with an unapproved rate reduction and a sharp increase in closing costs to {$12000.00}, with an estimated cash-to-close of {$6600.00}. 

We immediately refused to sign this disclosure, as we had not been consulted about any rate change or cost adjustments. When we asked for clarification, the loan originator stated, I had to reduce the rate more because the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ) must be at least a 0.5 % difference, including mortgage insurance. 

Despite having made our XXXX payment, our loan amount had increased, which made no financial sense. When we pressed for an explanation, we received a vague and inconsistent response that failed to clarify why closing costs remained inflated despite a lower rate and a lower principal balance. 


On XX/XX/XXXX, the underwriter emailed us stating that our loan was ready for approval. The following day, XX/XX/XXXX, we received a new disclosure with slightly lower closing costs but a higher cash-to-close amount of {$7300.00}. We were assured this figure would not exceed our monthly mortgage payment, so we signed the documents in good faith. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, we reached out for an update. The underwriter replied, stating, Im unable to obtain approval due to an issue with the cash to close. The homeowners insurance payment has already been made to XXXX, which has resulted in an escrow overdraft of {$1400.00}. Because of this, the loan can not move forward until the XXXX mortgage payment has been made. 

We expressed concern that we were now being asked to make a second mortgage payment within 30 days and requested to speak with a manager. The loan originator assured us that once the XXXX payment was made, your escrow will be corrected, you will not owe a payment for XXXX or XXXX, and your next payment will be due in XXXX. 
Relying on that assurance, we made the XXXX payment, which cleared on XX/XX/XXXX. 

During this same period, the loan originators supervisor informed us that FHA loans have a strict closing deadline of the XXXX of each montha policy that had never been disclosed to us before this point. 

Continued Inconsistencies and Financial Impact On XX/XX/XXXX, we received yet another disclosure. Despite having made two payments, our loan amount increased again, this time to {$400000.00}, and the cash-to-close was listed at {$6700.00}. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, we again contacted the loan originator seeking clarification on why our payments were not reflected in the figures. The response we received included yet another revised cash-to-close estimate of {$3000.00} for XXXX. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, another disclosure arrived with the same loan amount of {$400000.00}, closing costs of {$7900.00}, and a cash-to-close of {$3900.00}. Hoping to finalize before the next FHA deadline, we signed the documents. 

Shortly afterward, a new underwriter contacted us, requesting updated documents and presenting two options : 1. Pay {$3100.00} by XX/XX/XXXX, or XXXX. Make our regular XXXX mortgage payment on XX/XX/XXXX, and have closing costs ready to close before XX/XX/XXXX. 
We responded that paying two full mortgage payments within 30 days was financially unrealistic for an FHA household and requested that any resulting late fees be waived, as this situation was entirely caused by Lakeviews internal errors. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX day after our original due date, the original underwriter called to confirm the same two options and stated that if we could not comply, we would need to withdraw our application. We expressed frustration that these terms were never disclosed at the start of the process, that our budget had been destabilized, and that we now faced potential late fees and credit implications due to Lakeviews delays.

The underwriter later emailed to confirm that a fee waiver request had been submitted to a senior manager, though with no guarantee of approval. The loan originator then called to shift blame to the underwriter and again requested we make payment before the XXXX, this time without following up in writing, as requested. 

We have since followed up with all parties via email to maintain a documented record of communications. 

At this point, we have been denied the opportunity to benefit from lower interest rates and placed under significant financial strain. This process has forced us to restructure our household budget, damaged our ability to seek financing from alternative lenders due to reported late payments, and resulted in uncertainty regarding the accuracy of Lakeviews calculations. 

We find it unacceptable that our loan amount increased despite two payments, that closing costs fluctuated between {$7000.00} and {$13000.00} without explanation, and that key procedural details such as the FHA XXXX deadline were withheld until after the fact. 

We also question whether Lakeviews handling of this process reflects an attempt to generate new customer commission, rather than to serve us fairly as existing customers. 

We respectfully request a full investigation into the discrepancies in our loan processing, the lack of transparency, and the undue financial hardship caused by Lakeviews actions.

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