Consumer complaint received 2021-05-12 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — 
Company: United Built Homes LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I have been discussing a possible home build with United Built Homes ( www.ubh.com ). 
On XX/XX/2021 ; I met with XXXX XXXX to provide initial information and discuss the floor plans and style of homes. 
On XX/XX/2021 ; I met with XXXX XXXX to discuss the initial offer from the in-house lender of United Built Homes. XXXX explained that even though I was willing to offer 3 acres for collateral, the in house lender wanted all 11 acres as collateral and was not considering a down payment. I explained to XXXX that to put up all 11 acres just for the build of the house at a 8.99 % interests rate seemed a bit unreasonable given that : 1. The house would be finished without flooring or appliances, thus making it harder to refinance because the house would already be over evaluated.

2. The house would possibly cost of the house at the time of refinancing could be an issue if/when lumber and construction costs decrease. The house that is costing {$180000.00} now just for construction could be viewed as only being worth {$150000.00} at time of refinancing because the depreciation based on the lower costs associated with building materials being much lower in the future. 

I then told XXXX that I am not willing to put up all 11 acres. However, I am willing to put up a down payment and reconsider downsizing in other ways like eliminating a metal roof or lessening the height of the house. I also told XXXX that if they are insistent on wanting the 11 acres given the risks that I will be taking on not being able to refinance a construction loan that is already running at the cost of the full build and the huge risk of depreciation then I would not be able to do business with them. XXXX also mentioned that they wanted even more land as collateral. I asked XXXX if there was a way that I could speak to them directly so that I can address any concerns that they had line by line. XXXX stated no, that this was not possible because this benefited me by them not being able to show any type of discrimination. I told XXXX that if she could get me a list of the things that the in-house lender was concerned about then I would address them. 

On XX/XX/2021 ; XXXX called me back and informed me that the United Built Homes in-house lender was not willing to reduce the collateral down to 3 acres and was insisting on 11 acres. When I asked about what was their concern, she stated the in-house lender told her that I had 100+ delinquencies on my credit report. When I explained to XXXX that I monitor my credit report daily from several different applications and bank services and know this was not true, then she asked " what reason would they have to lie ''. 

I explained to XXXX, that the benefit of them making my credit look worse would be to justify me putting up more land as collateral for a nearly no win situation for me. Basically, United Built Homes was attempting to set me up for a land grab knowing that they are intentionally placing me in a situation where it would be difficult to find a lender that would refinance the the house for the original loan amount. I also pointed out that even XXXX XXXX accepting/offering me a mortgage on this amount in 12 months is speculative and not guaranteed as we had discussed. 

I am suggesting that United Built Homes in-house lending service is intentionally making my credit appear to be worse than it is in-order to help place me in a situation where they are almost guaranteed to gain the land and house because they have intentionally created a situation where it will be difficult for me to refinance the home once it is completed because they know the house will be valued less. I am also suggesting that they would stretch out the build process over the year causing me extra expenses and that they are intentionally under estimating their home build completion time. I am also suggesting that the person processing the decision in the in-house lending department is intentionally providing less options for collateral because I caught what appears to be a con-game and trick.

Company public response: Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation