Consumer complaint received 2025-12-02 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Application denials
Company: Rocket Mortgage, LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
CFPB COMPLAINT PACKAGE Rocket Mortgage Loan Misconduct / Regulatory Violation Complaint Prepared for : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # : XXXX Property : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX CFPB COMPLAINT FORMAL STATEMENT ROCKET MORTGAGE CFPB COMPLAINT PACKAGE Mortgage Lender : Rocket Mortgage , LLC ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Loan Type : FHA 30-Year Fixed Borrowers : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Subject Property : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, FL XXXX Original Closing Date : XX/XX/XXXX Extended Contract Deadline : XX/XX/XXXX Complaint Filed With : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Nature of Complaint : Unfair, deceptive, inconsistent, and non-FHA-compliant underwriting practices resulting in severe contract risk and harm to consumer. 

I. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT Rocket Mortgage has engaged in unfair, deceptive, and inconsistent lending practices by : 1. Introducing unsupported and contradictory conditions after issuing a valid Conditional Approval. 
2. Misclassifying fully verified borrower assets as intermingled despite approving the identical funds earlier for EMD. 
3. Demanding a gift fund of approx. {$3300.00} despite the borrowers having fully documented and sufficient assets that originate from the same source as the Escrow, which has been deemed usable on every LE. 
4. Failing to cite any FHA 4000.1 guideline to justify the new condition, even after repeated written requests. 
5. Threatening denial on the day of closing without issuing an official adverse action notice. 
6. Using phone calls instead of written communication to avoid documentation, in violation of ECOA written communication requirements. 
7. Missing two contractual closing dates ( XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ) due entirely to lender-created issues and refusing to resolve them despite clear documentation. 
The borrowers have fully satisfied every financial condition originally disclosed. 
Rocket Mortgage has not cited any FHA guideline supporting their new condition and is contradicting its own written approvals. 
The conduct directly threatens : A {$15000.00} Earnest Money Deposit ( EMD ) A valid Florida purchase contract The borrowers ability to close Compliance with FHA 4000.1, ECOA, and CFPB mortgage origination rules We request an immediate executive-level review, underwriting correction, and resolution. 

II. DETAILED NARRATIVE OF MISCONDUCT 1. Conditional Approval Issued No Asset Restrictions Disclosed ( Exhibit A Conditional Approval Letter ) On XX/XX/XXXX, Rocket Mortgage issued a Conditional Approval with no mention of : Intermingled funds Asset ineligibility Tainted funds Gift requirement Any restriction on checking or savings accounts The only item requiring sourcing was a large deposit which was fully documented and approved. 

2. EMD Was Approved Using the Same Funds Later Rejected ( Exhibit B EMD Approval Email ) Rocket confirmed in writing that the {$15000.00} Earnest Money Deposit was fully sourced and acceptable under FHA guidelines. 
This EMD originated from the same account Rocket later claimed was intermingled and unusable. 
This contradiction forms the core of the complaint. 

3. Rocket Introduced New, Unsupported Conditions After Borrower Escalation After the borrowers identified calculation discrepancies from negative XXXX and asked for clarification, Rocket suddenly introduced : A new claim that checking/savings accounts were intermingled A new requirement for a {$3300.00} gift A threat of denial if the gift was not provided No FHA 4000.1 guideline supports these conditions. 

4. The Denial Threat Email ( MOST DAMAGING ) ( Exhibit E Pending Denial / Gift Demand Email ) On XX/XX/XXXX, Rocket sent the following : Your loan is not scheduled to close and is pending a denial we are unable to use your checking and savings let us know if you are able to obtain a gift This is a regulatory violation because : No adverse action notice was issued No FHA guideline was cited after multiple written requests Borrower assets were already verified ( see XXXX + bank statements ) Gift requirement contradicts FHA rules These new demands began on Monday XX/XX/XXXX with closing scheduled for Friday XX/XX/XXXX After missing the first closing, the same unsupported condition led to missing XX/XX/XXXX, the second closing extension. 
This denial threat was issued ON the closing date at end of business These new conditions came after Rocket sent closing instructions, prompting us to activate XXXX services at the property, which remain active as of XX/XX/XXXX This email alone warrants a CFPB investigation. 

5. Failure to Provide Written FHA Citation Despite Repeated Requests ( Exhibit F Executive Escalation Emails ) Borrowers repeatedly asked : Please cite the FHA 4000.1 guideline that prohibits us from using our verified funds. 
Rocket refused to provide any guideline and simply repeated the request for a gift. 
This is a violation of : ECOA FHA underwriting requirements Written communication standards 6. Senior VP Misrepresentation ( Exhibit G XXXX XXXX XXXX Email ) A Senior Vice President wrote : If you can not satisfy the conditions Rocket requires, we will not be able to help you secure financing. 
This implies borrower fault when : All borrower conditions were met Only lender-manufactured issues remain No FHA guideline supports the new demands This constitutes misleading and harmful communication. 

7. Lender Missed the Closing Date Twice and Caused Contract Damage ( Exhibit I Contract Excerpt ) Due solely to Rockets late and unsupported condition, the borrowers : Missed both the XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX closings Were forced to sign contract extensions twice Are at risk of losing a {$15000.00} deposit Are at risk of losing housing stability Are currently paying two separate electric services ( XXXX ) per Rockets instruction to activate services received on XX/XX/XXXX. 
The delay is 100 % lender-created without justification. 

8. Phone Calls Instead of Written Decisions ( Exhibit H Voicemail Screenshots ) Rocket left repeated voicemails stating we have an update but refused to put anything in writing, even after borrowers demanded written-only communication. 
When written responses were finally provided, they repeated the same unsupported gift demand, without addressing FHA guideline requests. 
This is a pattern of concealment designed to avoid written accountability. 

9. Steering Violation Attempt to Redirect or Reassign the Loan ( Exhibit M XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Rocket Mortgage engaged in conduct suggestive of mortgage steering, prohibited under CFPB UDAAP standards, RESPA anti-steering rules, and FHA origination conduct requirements. 
A Rocket team leader, XXXX XXXX, stated in writing that Rocket could : package your loan outside of Rocket. 
This raises serious concerns : Rocket can not package or redirect a federally regulated FHA loan without issuing a formal withdrawal or denial No adverse action notice was issued This statement came after Rocket introduced unsupported conditions and requested a gift Steering is defined as influencing or directing a borrower toward a different lender or channel to avoid completing the originally approved loan In context, this statement appears to be a work-around to avoid correcting Rockets own underwriting errors This is a prohibited act, and CFPB review is warranted. 

III. VIOLATIONS FOR CFPB REVIEW CFPB must investigate for potential violations of : 1. FHA 4000.1 Guidelines Improper exclusion of acceptable assets. 
2. ECOA ( 12 CFR 1002 ) Failure to provide written adverse action. 
Using coercive communication. 
Introducing new conditions after approval. 
3. CFPB Mortgage Origination Rules Unfair & deceptive acts ( UDAAP ). 
Misrepresentation of loan requirements. 
Unsupported underwriting changes. 
4. Contractual Harm & Consumer Damage Risk to EMD Risk to purchase contract Loss of time Increased loan costs Forced extensions

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation