Consumer complaint received 2016-01-14 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker — 
Company: Solidifi US, Inc.
State: DC

Complaint narrative:
Contractors working on behalf of Southwestern Financial Services , Ltd. ( SFS ), an appraisal management company ( XXXX ) provided XXXX bad appraisals on my home. In each of the appraisals, Southwestern failed to compare my house against comparable properties ( size, functionality, renovations/upgrades ) in my neighborhood and subsequently refused to adjust or revise the appraisals for more than a miniscule amount when presented with credible, viable information showing comparable properties within my neighborhood that sold for much higher amounts ( anywhere from {$100000.00} more to almost {$200000.00} more ). For example, my home is fully renovated, has energy efficient systems and appliance, and is blocks from the subway station. Yet, the houses used for comps were dilapidated properties that the only thing they had in common with my house was the year built and square footage. SFS was provided with evidence of comparable renovated properties ( interior and exterior pics could be found online ), yet SFS chose to stand by comps where there was no evidence that the properties had been upgraded or renovated. In fact, the exterior pictures of the comp properties and the sales description that could be found online tell just the opposite story. SFS nor its contractors made any adjustments to address the positive differences in my property as compared to the dilapidated properties used as comps. The XXXX renovated property that was used was no where near the subway station, yet, no adjustment was made to reflect this difference. In addition, in some instances SFS used appraisals that were at least 6 months old, when there were comparable, renovated properties sold within the last 90 days. 
The first appraisal conducted by SFS 's contractor was so bad the company agreed to throw it out. But when the second appraisal showed similar defects, SFS simply added a XXXX to the appraised value. When challenged about why upgraded properties were not used as comps and their contractor merely looked at square footage, SFS failed to provide any reasonable justification for its position and refused to appropriately revise the appraisal to compare my property to other renovated houses. The way that these appraisals were developed flies in the face of appraisal standards. If square footage and the age of the house were the only factors used to compare properties their would be little differentiation of properties and honestly, as a homeowner, no financial incentive to upgrade or renovate a property. 
The worst part of this is that as the affected consumer, I seem to have little recourse to challenge SFS. While I paid for the appraisal, the lender as stated that I can not talk to the company directly. At the same time, the lender has stated that they can not challenge the appraiser/appraisal because they can not influence the appraisal process. So without going to court, I am left at the mercy of SFS 's decision. 
A detailed review of appraisals done by SFS within XXXX area will show that they are engaging in redlining by providing XXXX American homeowners low appraisals and providing non-minority persons much higher appraisals, Such a practice is unlawful and it is robbing XXXX American homeowners of equity. Each month XXXX Americans are getting loans at the higher values to either purchase or renovate existing homes in my area. Many of these properties would have been appraised by SFS 's contractors, given the size of the company. Yet, in talking with other XXXX American homeowners in the area, I am learning that they have run into the same experience, i.e., the undervaluing of their property through the appraisal process.

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