Consumer complaint received 2025-05-07 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — Changes in loan terms during or after closing
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: MS

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint against my mortgage lender for introducing significant and inconsistent underwriting conditions just days before closing, which are jeopardizing our scheduled home purchase set for XXXX XXXX XXXX Although the lender has now responded to my concerns, several critical issues remain unresolved or inadequately addressed. 

Debt-to-Income ( DTI ) Ratio and Lease Requirement : The lender now claims our DTI ratio must be reduced from 54 % to 49 % in order for underwriting to approve the loan. They proposed several last-minute options to address this, including : Paying down student loans ( some of which are under federal litigation and in forbearance ), Increasing the down payment ( potentially via retirement withdrawal or gift funds ), or Renting out our current property to generate income. 

This final optionrequiring us to lease out our current homewas never previously disclosed and contradicts our original application, which clearly stated the new property is for owner-occupancy. The lender now claims that to count rental income for DTI purposes, the property must be rented with one month of rent collected. Recommending a complete shift in intended property use at this stage is unreasonable, impractical, and potentially misleading under underwriting disclosures. 

Student Loans in Litigation-Based Forbearance : My federal student loans are currently in forbearance due to the ongoing XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX class-action litigation. The lender insists that the Loan Product Advisor ( LP ) system automatically requires 0.5 % of the loan balance to be included in the DTI calculation, even though the loans are not in repayment and are effectively frozen by the federal government. They also advised us to consider paying them downadvice that may jeopardize my legal position in the case and is financially unsound. My husband 's loans are under an Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, which the lender also appears to be misapplying by disregarding actual required payments. My husband is a doctor, DNP, presently employed with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 

XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Now Resolved ) : We were previously informed by the title company that no request had been made for title search or lenders title insurance. The lender later stated that this request had been submitted on XXXX XXXX XXXX. As of today, they informed us that the title work is now complete. However, this miscommunication caused additional stress and contributed to concerns about poor coordination and oversight on the lenders part. 

Timing and Pressure : These issuesincluding the lease requirement, suggested payoffs, and down payment restructuringwere raised just 6 business days before our closing date. We have met all prior conditions and provided documentation in a timely manner, including proof of paid HOA dues, lease on additional rental property, proof of taxes paid, proof of quarterly taxes, etc. The sudden introduction of new financial burdens and conditions, especially those unrelated to prior disclosures, appears to be an undue pressure tactic or the result of mismanagement. 

Request for Relief : We are asking the CFPB to : Investigate whether the lenders late-stage changes are consistent with federal lending regulations and consumer protections ; Ensure accurate and fair treatment of student loans in litigation-based forbearance and IDR plans ; Determine whether underwriting guidelines were properly disclosed and applied ; Compel the lender to remove unjustified conditions and allow the loan to proceed based on original, accurate terms. 

I am prepared to provide supporting documentation, including email correspondence with the lender, upon request.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation