Consumer complaint received 2019-08-07 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — 
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: MS

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint against Bank of America Home Loans XXXX XXXX dba XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX for deceptive and unfair banking practices in the mortgage and credit risk department. They are intentionally using an appraisal report where the appraiser has committed the following 2019 USPAP Violations : Standard Rule 1-1 ( a  ) ( b ) ( c ). A substantial amount of errors where noted that significant affect the opinions and credibility of the appraisal report. The sales value was based on inaccurate information regarding the condition of the property and the appraisal report contained multiple errors that significantly impact the credibility. 

This complaint will reveal how the lender intentionally used insufficient information to support the credit decision and has failed to monitor the performance of the appraiser who performed the evaluation. The lender failed to properly dismiss the appraisal even after knowledge of violation of appraisal regulations that demonstrates the appraiser performed the evaluation in a reckless and negligent matter. 

An appraisal was conducted on XX/XX/2019 and the report was provided to me on XX/XX/XXXX. An official appraisal dispute notice, XXXX XXXX Selling Guide, property condition disclosure, purchase agreement, accepted seller repairs, inspection report, subject property XXXX listings, pre and post renovation photos of the property, comparable sales proximity information, 2 proposed comparable properties and the county Landroll detail were submitted with my dispute. The lender claimed that another appraisal would be completed, however on XX/XX/2019, it was communicated to me that the appraisal reconsideration was completed and there was no change in value. The appraisal report contained the following errors and inconsistencies. 

1. Subject : The appraiser indicated that the property was owner occupied which is inconsistent with the Property Condition Disclosure and inspection conducted on XX/XX/2019. Occupancy Status of Home noted as Vacant/Staged with the approximate age of building noted as 48 Years Old ( Remodeled ) on Inspection Report. 

2. Contract : The appraiser claimed to have read the sales contract but indicated that there were no sales concessions which is inconsistent with the special provisions noted in the purchase agreement executed on XX/XX/2019. The sellers have agreed to pay the difference in the homestead and non-homestead tax exemption. 

3. Property Condition : The following condition rating/comment noted in the appraisal is inconsistent with the definition of rating C3 noted on the UAD Definitions Addendum on page 7, C3, Kitchen-updated-one to five years ago, Bathrooms-updated-six to ten years ago, Kitchen-updated-one to five years ago, The subject is in Average condition and constructed of average workmanship. The property is in Average functional condition and has not been impacted by external depreciation. Per the Property Condition Disclosure and XXXX Listing XXXX, the sellers, XXXX and XXXX XXXX, purchased and gained title of this unoccupied foreclosure property in XX/XX/2019. The XXXX completed a full interior and exterior renovation on the subject property that aligns with rating C2 noted in the addendum on page 7 and Remodeled level of updating classification in XXXX XXXX Selling Guide Section B4-1.3-06. 

The quality rating and definition of Q3 noted on the UAD Definitions Addendum on page 7 is inconsistent with the definition of rating Q3 and aligns with rating Q2 noted in the addendum on page 7.

4. Amenities and Garage/Carport- The selections noted in the report are inconsistent with the Subject portion of the Sales Comparison Approach section on page 2 that indicates the Porch/Patio/Deck section as Porch/Patio, No. In addition, it is inconsistent with the Additional Comments section on page 3 states, A 1.0 story detached single-family house wit 2,318 above-grade finished square feet and 0 above grade unfinished square feet with a utility / storage room. In addition, the property includes a deck, patio, porch and a 2 car  carport. 

5. Sales Comparison Approach : The miles noted in the Proximity to Subject section on page 3 and the Location Map Addendum on page 19 are inconsistent with miles verified by XXXXt. 

6. Cost Approach to Value : The following comment is inconsistent with the facts of this transaction, it should be noted that VA does not require the cost approach to value. The zoning information was derived from the local government via of a telephone call during the development process. Estimated Remaining Economic Life-HUD and VA only- 25 Years. Per review of Abbreviations Used in Data Standardization Text on page 8, VA stands for Veterans Administration. The borrower has no affiliation with the military in any capacity that warrants the Veterans Administration. 

The following clarification requests were submitted to the lender and appraiser.

1. Site Section : Borrower questions validity of following comment documented in the report, The site dimensions were derived from the local tax assessor 's office. The dimensions are approximated and were the best data available in the normal course of business. I wasn't provided with a survey to verify dimensions. The Sales Comparison Approach section on page 2 and Sketch Addendum on page 21 notes a square footage of 2,318 for the subject property. 

The Building Info section of the XXXX County MS Landroll Detail note the Base Area for the property at 2,243 sq. ft. and the Adjusted Area at 2,469 sq. ft. Square footage on property noted at 2,243 in  the XXXX system. The square footage noted in the Sketch Addendum supersedes both Tax and XXXX  records. 

In closing, I humbly request either of the following solutions : 1. Require the lender to dismiss the appraisal report and conduct an independent appraisal. 2. Perform an in-house evaluation within 3-5 business days since the transaction value is only {$190000.00} or 3. Require the appraiser to submit a revision to report to apply all missing updates to the value of the property. I have already spent hundreds of closing costs regarding this property and it will be unfair to suffer the loss due to deceptive banking practices. I appreciate your time and consideration.

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