Consumer complaint received 2018-02-25 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — 
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
ref. CitiBank Equitylink loan XXXX my letter to CFPB CFPB complaint XXXX I am formally requesting that the CFPB reopen my case, since Citis recitation of facts in their response is basically untrue.I did not apply for a $ XXXX loan, which is at the top of Citis response, but for $ XXXX. Second of all they loped about {$22000.00} off of my yearly income ( see my last paragraph ) .I realize that more than the 60 days you allow has gone by, but the urgency of securing my finances precluded meeting that deadline. 

Through a chain of circumstances, I paid cash to purchase my new home, ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, Fl XXXX ), on XX/XX/XXXX. Since the IRS gives taxpayers 60 days to rollover IRA and 401K transfers, I immediately started my quest for a mortgage or an equity link to replenish my interest bearing - and income producing assets. On XX/XX/XXXX or XX/XX/XXXX I met with the branch manager of the Citibank XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX FL branch bank to discuss terms and conditions. After checking he assured me, and committed to a 30 to 40 day turnaround for a $ XXXX equity link based on my 780+ credit rating ( Attachment iii ). Shortly afterwards I was asked to supply copies of my XXXX & XXXX Tax returns which I did. Then, about a week later I was given a filled in form XXXX ( note to IRS asking for copies of tax returns for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX to be turned over to Citibank ), which I signed at the bank. Over a month later ( XX/XX/XXXX ) the loan processor called me directly and told me that the form had been filled out improperly, switching my current and former addresses, and the IRS had said ( correctly ) that there was no record of my return in FL for XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX. The processors had been calling the branch asking them to get a corrected, signed form XXXX, but the branch never contacted me about the request in spite of almost daily phone calls from me asking the cause of the delay. I put the delay down in my mind as due to incompetence at the local branch, but now, in hindsite, I realize it was part of a pattern. 

Meanwhile, I'd gone through 5 processors, several underwriters, several equity loan department managers and countless assurances that I'll be called back, but ( other than on 1 call in XX/XX/XXXX by the latest new processor ), I've never been called back. To add insult to injury, I've been repeatedly asked to supply the same documentation that's already in Citi 's hands. As an example, I was notified by Citi that my XXXX XXXX XXXX checking account showed roughly $ 300k of deposits in XX/XX/XXXX ... .with the dates and amounts listed ( obtained from my checking account statement ). I was asked to supply the source of each of these deposits, and statements from those sources which showed the assets before and after withdrawal ... .I sent the requested material but pointed out that a ) the checking account statement line entry from which Citi got the $ amount also listed the source ... so why did they need the source documents?, and b ) each and every source before and after statement had been already supplied to Citi at least twice previously ( as well as a listing of the dates when the statements had been supplied ) ... no response to that query has ever been given, as well. 

In Citis response letter to both the CFPB and I, Citi claims that I was slow or deliquent in replying to their request for documents. But in actual fact they asked for the same documents repeatedly .I complained about the redundant requests, but complied. Since I kept records of each request and each submission I can prove the validity of my compliance, but Citi does not identify what requests of theirs were not supplied.in your reinvestigation, ask Citi to identify the missing/late documents, Further, I was asked to provide a copy of the XXXX XXXX XXXX decommit letter ... .on 4 separate occasions. I had responded that XXXX had requested a thirty day extension on XX/XX/XXXX, three days before the scheduled closing, which the seller refused. There was no decommit letter, other than the one I sent my stock brokerage firm ( who had arranged the loan ). I supplied Citi with that email letter to XXXX at least twice, once via my personal banker at the local branch, and once to an earlier processor, XXXX XXXX. 

In their reply to my original letter directly to Citi, and in response to your inquiry, Citi incorrectly identified IBMs reimbursement of medical insurance coverage ( {$4000.00} ) as medical expense coverage, and said since it didnt show in my XXXX returns, it couldnt be counted as income. Fair enough, but Citi also claimed that the {$15000.00} of income from my Iras,401Ks and stock portfolio  shown on my XXXX no longer existed and so couldnt be counted, in spite of the fact that the entire purpose of the loan was to reestablish those accounts. Their arguments are thus mostly sophistry, particularly since I suggested to Citi that I had no reason to replentish the IRAs and 401Ks at the original institutions and would be happy to switch to Citi. 

The most satisfying resolution to my complaint would be a $ XXXX loan at the rate prevailing in XX/XX/XXXX, and the minimum resolution would be Citis responsibility for any IRS penalties.

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