Consumer complaint received 2022-02-08 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — 
Company: Long & Foster Financial Services, Inc.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to submit a formal complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX : XXXX ), a representative of Prosperity Home Mortgage , LLC ( XXXX : XXXX ) where, XXXX XXXX is employed under the title Senior Mortgage Consultant. 

I am the seller of a real estate transaction involving a XXXX XXXX unit located in XXXX XXXX ( hereinafter the Property ). The Property was placed under contact on XX/XX/XXXX. The Buyer elected to pursue a VA loan, and the transaction had the following dates set, as communicated to both parties on the Mutual Acceptance Date : Binding Agreement Date : XX/XX/XXXX Due Diligence Contingency Expiry Date : XX/XX/XXXX Financing Contingency Expiry Date : XX/XX/XXXX Appraisal Contingency Expiry Date : XXXX XXXX Closing Date : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was the point person when it came to the Buyers mortgage. She handled communications with not only the buyer-side and seller-side realtors, but also the closing attorneys. Ergo, it is reasonable to presume that she directed, or otherwise oversaw and had direct detailed knowledge of, the Buyers VA loan application process. 

The Closing Date was pushed back twice first from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, then from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. The reason behind the delays on both occasions was the Buyers mortgage process was dragging out. Throughout these delays, XXXX XXXX falsely represented that the only thing holding back the mortgage ( and therefore the closing ) was the appraisal of the property. Indeed, an XXXX didnt even enter the Property until XX/XX/XXXX, the day before the initial closing date. 

Why there were seemingly no efforts to hire alternative appraisers, or otherwise try to speed up the process up to the day before the initial closing date, Ill never know but thats secondary. What matters for this case is that the appraisal delays were the quoted reason behind the closing date being pushed back twice, and through it all XXXX XXXX claimed this was the sole item of concern prior to closing. In fact, XXXX XXXX personally represented that the buyer was well-qualified, and had all the necessary pre-approval to proceed with the VA loan for this specific transaction. 

The appraisal report was received by XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and the purchase price was supported, clearing the way for closing on XX/XX/XXXX. However, the deal fell through on the day of closing when the Buyer defaulted on the contract by failing to secure a loan. To believe the buyer sides explanation, XXXX XXXX failed to identify whether the Property was VA approved or not. Needless to say, this is a critical first step to determine whether the Buyer can qualify for a VA loan for the deal, and certainly falls under the financing contingency. It is clear that XXXX XXXX either knowingly misrepresented the status of the Buyers mortgage application process, or was negligent in her duties to perform the most basic due diligence when processing the Buyers VA loan application. 

As a side note, the management of the Property clarified that the building was VA loan approved, and a simple building search on the VAs own Loan Guaranty website lists the Property as approved. 

The detrimental combination of XXXX XXXX actions and failures has caused significant harm to both sides of this transaction. As the Seller, I have incurred significant costs for speeding up the moving out process, paying for temporary housing arrangements, and a multitude of mortgage, HOA, and interest related financial charges.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation