Consumer complaint received 2026-04-30 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — Closing disclosure or other related disclosures
Company: NORTHPOINT MORTGAGE, INC.
State: ME

Complaint narrative:
This is a continuation of complaint XXXX First, I would like to express my disappointment in a lender avoiding ownership of fraud collusion by one of its employees. I wish I could say I'm surprised that a corporation would protect itself over a victim of fraud, but I am not. To summarize the previous complaint in order to begin this one, I was married to XXXX XXXX. When we split, we agreed to a lump sum payout, and I was going to use these proceeds to purchase a small home with my XXXX XXXX. She was going to refinance the home in order to pay me {$50000.00} ( which included the payoff of my car and $ XXXX in cash ). The originator knew we were married, and we were referred to her to refinance to split our assets & debts. She knew we were married, and yet she allowed the borrower to apply for the loan as an unmarried borrower. I have included the email that introduced us to the originator, in which the realtor tells her we are married ( she should know since she was at our wedding! ). Why does this matter, and why is the lender responsible? 1 ). I have attached the mortgage application taken by XXXX XXXX, mortgage originator XXXX XXXX. At the very top of the application it reads these words : TO BE COMPLETED BY LENDER. Therefore it's clear, that the originator XXXX, filled out the application, not my ex, XXXX. Therefore the final line in the lender 's response where they advise that this is between me and XXXX and I should take it up against her, is false. 2 ). What does it mean to be an unmarried borrower, vs. a separated borrower going through a divorce? XXXX XXXX, the federal agency which purchased this loan from Northpoint, would have REQUIRED a signed financial agreement, separation agreement, or final divorce decree in order to disseminate ( I have included a screenshot of the underwriting requirements ) any debts that were due or going to be due as a result of this divorce, or any alimony or ongoing support that would be due. It is required by federal lending agencies that ALL debts be disclosed on the application. By omitting the fact that XXXX was married, separated, and going through a divorce, XXXX and Northpoint, misled the underwriter who was looking at the file, and lied XXXX XXXX about the borrower 's qualifications and ability to pay. 3 ). In looking at the application I attached here ( obtained during full disclosure in my divorce proceedings ) the lies appear in the following areas ; 1a ) personal information- unmarried - FALSE STATEMENT, both married and separated were other choices here 5b ) are you a guarantor on any debt that is not disclosed on this application? -no- FALSE STATEMENT These false statements resulted in the omission of important information that would have resulted in a different closing. 4 ). Northpoint 's response hides behind the privacy laws, but in fact I did not ask for any information which I did not already have. This was a moot argument. Yes-she acquired the home alone- I did not argue this fact. The title is in her name, yes I am not arguing this fact. No liens or judgements were recorded at the registry- this may have been true because we had just begun our formal divorce process at the time of this application, and were hoping not to have to use lawyers. That's why it's SO IMPORTANT for originators and lenders to fully disclose ALL INFORMATION to the underwriter and the federal agency to which they report. THIS IS WHERE THE FRAUD LIES. This information WAS DISCLOSED TO XXXX XXXX AND THUS TO NORTHPOINT MORTGAGE, whether it appeared in a title search or not. 5 ). It was not up to Northpoint Mortgage to find information which could not be found. True. But the information was not invisible. The information was given to the originator in the VERY FIRST SENTENCE ever written to XXXX XXXX and Northpoint Mortgage. The collusion between XXXX XXXX and my ex XXXX XXXX, caused a string of events in my life that cost me the sum that I disclosed in my previous complaint, let alone the pain and suffering of the stress to me and my children, as I had to move multiple times, hire an attorney, and deal with a court case that lasted over 2 years, which ALL WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED if XXXX was honest on the application she submitted. XXXX would NOT have been able to be considered without the formal agreement in hand and she would NOT have been able to receive her closing proceeds without paying me. It was my understanding all along ( I spoke to XXXX and had email correspondence multiple times with her, as she asked for my cooperation in signing things and agreeing to things throughout the process ) that XXXX had correctly applied, and was being correctly underwritten, and I was going to be correctly compensated, until the very end, when she said " I'm not paying you ''. It wasn't until I saw the mortgage note that appears in public view that said " an unmarried woman '', that I realized fraud had been committed. Let me be more clear. My next step is to notify the FBI and XXXX XXXX that Northpoint Mortgage and their originator XXXX XXXX colluded to defraud a federal agency, by knowingly applying for a loan with false information on it, to benefit the borrower. I have been consulting with an attorney, and if I have to actually retain them, I will add my legal fees to my claim against Northpoint and XXXX XXXX. A reminder of the definition of mortgage fraud : 18 US Code 1014- It is a crime to knowingly make false statements or reports for the purpose of influencing a bank, mortgage lender, or other financial institution. Examples of violations : Hiding debts. Potential penalties include fines, up to 30 years in federal prison, or both. A loan officer who lies to help a borrower qualify is still committing mortgage fraud, because of the same statute- making or submitting false information to influence a loan decision. Because of the involvement of the originator, 18 US Code 1344 also applies, it is illegal to knowingly execute a scheme to defraud a financial institution.

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