Consumer complaint received 2025-09-24 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — Closing disclosure or other related disclosures
Company: SIMMONS FIRST NATIONAL CORPORATION
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
With full respect to XXXX XXXX XXXX, I need to clarify why XXXX XXXX  handling of my complaint was unacceptable. My intent here is not personal toward XXXX XXXX, her credentials as a XXXX  and XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX are evident. However, I waited over six weeks out of respect for XXXX XXXX and in good faith that I would receive a legal response to a complaint that is fundamentally about property rights and equitable interest. 


After all that time, Simmons finally responded not with legal reasoning, but with an accounting/risk management explanation from XXXX XXXX. That was deeply disappointing. I did not file a CFPB complaint to be given a XXXX  generalized risk perspective. I filed it to receive the banks legal explanation for how and why a deed of trust was recorded without recognizing my equitable interest in a 20-acre tract of land. This is not an accounting issue, its a legal one. Simmons knows that, and yet they closed the complaint as if it were resolved. 

I also have independent confirmation that a Simmons employee had actual knowledge of my claim. A Simmons employee told a third party that they contacted either my father or my brother and asked if I should be called about the matter. They were told not to call me. This demonstrates Simmons had notice of my involvement and still deliberately excluded me. I am preserving this witness evidence and will provide it to counsel and regulators if necessary.

It is unacceptable for Simmons Bank to treat a nearly 2 month long CFPB complaint as resolved when no legal explanation was ever provided. I specifically asked for legal reasoning, since Missouri courts recognize equitable interest as legal interest under certain circumstances. Instead, Simmons told me vaguely that I was not entitled to more information. That is not a resolution. That is evasion.

Furthermore, my equitable interest was not theoretical. In 2015 I made substantial improvements by constructing a kart racing track on the property. I even attempted a 1031 exchange with a family trust in California, which my father was aware of, to resolve the property tax dilemma and secure like-kind land. These facts show my possessory control and reliance on the promised transfer, facts which Simmons ignored completely in their response.

I respectfully request that this matter be reopened and reassigned. Because the core issue is one of property rights, equitable title, and Missouri real estate law, I specifically ask that Simmons legal/compliance department provide the response not accountingnot risk management. Simmons Bank should be required to provide either ( a ) a legal opinion from counsel explaining why my equitable interest is invalid, or ( b ) a corrective action plan to address my claim. Anything less fails to meet the CFPBs consumer protection purpose.

Finally, I want to be absolutely clear : I am not asking for special treatment, I am asking for a legitimate explanation from Simmons Bank. If by Monday of next week I do not receive a proper legal response that directly addresses my equitable interest and the banks handling of the refinance, I will take that silence as a refusal to engage. At that point, I will have no choice but to move forward with filing a Notice of Interest and pursuing the legal avenues available to me to secure what is rightfully mine, my land.

I want to resolve this amicably, but I will not allow indefinite delay or evasions to strip me of my rights. Simmons has long been aware of my 20-acre claim through former loan officer XXXX XXXX XXXX and my wife even made XXXX XXXX aware of 20 acres out there, when we were purchasing our new property. For Simmons to now act as if they were unaware is not only disingenuous, it raises serious questions about whether this was a deliberate attempt to misrepresent facts. At minimum, it is unacceptable ; at worst, it borders on fraud. 

Sincerely, ( without patience ) XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation