Consumer complaint received 2017-03-23 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker — 
Company: LD Holdings Group, LLC
State: ID

Complaint narrative:
I recently contacted Loan Depot and was put in touch with XXXX XXXX XXXX and received an introductory email from him on XX/XX/XXXX. I later called him and discussed, at length, my desire to do a VA REFI consolidation loan to pay off my existing credit card debt. As I told XXXX XXXX, this was my secondary reason for wanting to refinance my home. The primary reason was due to my desire to change mortgage lenders. I explained to XXXX XXXX, that for over five years, XXXX repeatedly refused to mail financial and other correspondence to me at my designated mailing address and continued to send this information to my property address. This was subjecting my financial information to compromise by persons rifling the mailboxes and/or unknown persons receiving my improperly cased mail from the postal service. I was a victim of identity theft during the late XX/XX/XXXX and law enforcement requested I set up a secure postal address from which to receive my mail. I was constantly being harassed by XXXX in this regard and finally contacted Loan Depot. During my first five ( recorded ) calls to XXXX XXXX, I made it very clear to him ( and XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) that before continuing with this refinancing of my home, I wanted assurances that this same mailing fiasco would not happen with Loan Depot. So, I requested to know from XXXX XXXX, if he could enter my mailing address as the primary address, include a note to only send mail to that address and notify all parties and agencies involved in the REFI that NO mail should be sent to my property address under any circumstances. XXXX XXXX told me he could do that and claimed he had done so when we next spoke on the phone. He also told me not to worry about anything, that he had done as I requested and I had his assurances that what I experienced with XXXX would not happen with Loan Depot or the servicing agent. I was told that everyone involved with my loan would be properly informed of the correct address for mail. I had the same conversation with XXXX XXXX, when he took control of the loan from XXXX XXXX and he told me in a phone conversation in late XX/XX/XXXX, that my correct mailing address was in the system along with a note on where to send my correspondence. I felt assured that I would not experience the same mailing issues I had with XXXX and relied on the promises of both men not to worry about the matter anymore. I trusted what they told me! However, on XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted XXXX XXXX by email and told him that I did receive the copies of my loan disclosures at my correct mailing address, but had not yet received my new loan payment documents. I told him I was concerned about missing my first payment and wanted to get things rolling. He sent me a reply that I should have the documents by XX/XX/XXXX. When I did not receive the documents by XX/XX/XXXX, I called the customer service line as instructed. I was informed by XXXX that my property address was the only address showing in the system and there was no note regarding the mailing of documents to me. The point in this matter is that I was lied to by several of your employees or agents in order to secure a refinance on my home through Loan Depot. If it is possible to undo this loan I would do so right now, because I feel I have been intentionally deceived by a financial organization for their own profit. If I had been told by these men that no assurances could be provided about my address then I would not have gone forward with this loan. The loan was authorized by me to proceed based upon the assurances and promises of these two men, which has since been proven to be a lie. It does not matter if there is one system or five systems involved in this issue. What matters is that I was assured that EVERYONE involved in my REFI and servicing of this loan would be notified as to the correct mailing address, which clearly was NOT done.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation