Consumer complaint received 2017-09-29 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — 
Company: Premia Mortgage, LLC
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX, last four XXXX Company complaint regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX  Following up to a previous complaint filed, I felt that Premia made numerous false statements in their response. I am mostly concerned with their assurance that they only requested a credit report twice. I have their requests for the following dates : XX/XX/XXXX ( prequal ), XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX -- credit reporting is also showing an inquiry on XX/XX/XXXX which is when I received a relocation package stating that Premia was the loan provider I should use. 
My second concern is regarding determining rental income. I recently visited with the local HUD office in XXXX XXXX, PA where we went over my tax returns, rental statements and rental income according to HUD 's policies. We also made similar calculation using XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX  requirements. 
According to XXXX XXXX XXXX, the rental income did not qualify as income based on HUD. HUD explained that Premia 's team did not read the requirements for calculating which clearly state how to handle one time only expenses, tax deductions, and days rented. I provided documentation that my rental property was only in service for seven months of XX/XX/XXXX, 12 months of XX/XX/XXXX, and current through XX/XX/XXXX ( now 10 months ).  XXXX XXXX through his conversation with me and his conversation with my realtor, XXXX XXXX confirmed that he did n't look over the tax returns provided ( included XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ). He based his continuous assertions that my income vs debts satisfied the qualifications for a FHA loan at 3.75 %. 
Clearly, Premia ignored, disregarded or were not competent to review financial documents for the purpose of qualifying consumers. Or, as stated in my original complaint, Premia 's intention is to defraud consumers. 
In addition, Premia asserts that I contacted them for a conventional loan. This assertion is false. I can provide emails back to XX/XX/XXXX that show that no conventional loans were discussed. Premia only discussed a conventional loan after claiming I could not qualify for a government loan. 
My complaint and request for action : 1. Premia clearly does not honor rate lock contracts evidenced by their efforts to claim that a rate lock is contingent upon a credit score. FHA/HUD does not have that standard. Premia does not have that clause included in any contracts. 
This action represents contract breach and violations of Federal Codes. 
2. Premia by and through its agent, XXXX XXXX, solicited and enticed a consumer to apply for a government loan. Then, Premia claimed the consumer did not qualify and pushed him/her toward their own private/ conventional loan products. This falls into the realm of fraud. 
3. Premia 's statement in response to previous complaint included deliberately false information and therefore intended to interfere with government processes and investigations.

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