Consumer complaint received 2026-01-22 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Manufactured home loan
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Fees or costs during the application process
Company: AMERISAVE MORTGAGE CORPORATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
References Prior CFPB Case Number : XXXX I am submitting this complaint as a continuation and expansion of my prior CFPB complaint referenced above. AmeriSave Mortgage Corporations response to the original complaint did not address critical facts, financial harm, or subsequent developments that materially worsen the consumer impact of this matter. 

Our refinance with cash-out loan was initiated on XX/XX/XXXX. At the time of application, we were advised that the average processing and closing timeline was approximately XXXX  days, creating a reasonable expectation of closing in XXXX or XX/XX/XXXX. Based on these representations, we proceeded in good faith and relied on the anticipated closing timeline when managing short-term financial obligations that were to be satisfied through the refinance. 

During processing, our loan file was reassigned multiple times due to internal staffing disruptions, including the termination of XXXX loan processors. Continuity of file management was disrupted, required conditions were not consistently tracked, and critical eligibility issues were not identified at intake. 

AmeriSave later asserted that the loan could not proceed because the manufactured home was classified as personal property rather than real property, making it ineligible per investor guidelines. This is a threshold eligibility issue that was known or reasonably discoverable at the time of application and should have been identified at or near loan intake not after months of processing, processor reassignments, and borrower reliance.

Despite this alleged ineligibility, AmeriSave : Continued processing for several months Reassigned the file multiple times Ordered third-party services Allowed reliance on repeated representations regarding loan viability and closing timelines AmeriSaves response characterizes the loan as merely prequalified, but also admits that clarification regarding conditional status should have been provided confirming that expectations were not properly set and reliance was foreseeable. 

Financial Harm Incurred As a direct result of AmeriSaves failure to properly screen eligibility at intake and the reliance induced during prolonged processing, I incurred significant, measurable financial harm, including : A {$790.00} appraisal fee ordered by AmeriSave on a loan later deemed ineligible An additional {$500.00} upfront payment made at the beginning of the application process The necessity for my spouse to withdraw funds from a 401 ( k ) to bring revolving credit accounts current after relying on representations that those debts would be paid off through the refinance These costs would not have been incurred had AmeriSave properly identified loan ineligibility at intake. 

Credit Damage At the time of application, my credit score was in the XXXX range. Following months of reliance on an anticipated closing, delayed payments that were intended to be satisfied through the refinance, and the eventual loan denial, my credit score has now fallen into the XXXX. 

This represents severe and long-term consumer harm, materially impairing access to credit, increasing future borrowing costs, and destabilizing financial recovery. This harm was foreseeable and avoidable. 

Repossession Notice Although the auto loan on our XXXX XXXX XXXX has since been brought current, I have now received a repossession notice that was issued during the period of delayed payments tied to reliance on the anticipated refinance closing. 

The issuance of a repossession notice represents high-severity consumer harm, creating imminent risk of loss of essential transportation, additional derogatory credit reporting, and employment and household instability. This escalation of harm was directly caused by payment timing decisions made in reliance on AmeriSaves representations and prolonged processing. 

Failure of AmeriSaves Response AmeriSaves response to the original complaint does not address : The prolonged processing timeline Internal staffing disruptions and processor turnover Failure to identify ineligibility at intake Borrower reliance and foreseeable harm Out-of-pocket financial losses Severe credit deterioration Issuance of a repossession notice Declaring the matter resolved without addressing these issues is inaccurate and insufficient. 
Requested Review I respectfully request that the CFPB review this matter for : Failure to properly screen loan eligibility at intake Inducement of borrower reliance through prolonged processing Foreseeable and avoidable financial and credit harm Consideration of restitution, including reimbursement of fees and compensation for documented consumer harm This complaint is submitted to ensure a complete regulatory record and to prevent similar harm to other consumers.

Company public response: Company believes the complaint provided an opportunity to answer consumer's questions
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation