BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.


BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that HomeServices Lending, LLC meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.


Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for HomeServices Lending, LLC include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 5 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

5 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 1 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 0
Billing/Collection Issues 1
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 4
Total Closed Complaints 5

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on HomeServices Lending, LLC
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: April 11, 2012 Business started: 11/02/1998 Business started locally: 11/02/1998 Business incorporated 11/02/1998 in MN
Licensing, Bonding or Registration

This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

These agencies may include:

Minnesota Secretary of State
180 State Office Bldg, 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Saint Paul MN 55155
http://www.sos.state.mn.us
Phone Number: (651) 296-2803

Minnesota Department of Commerce
85 7th Pl E Ste 500, Saint Paul MN 55101
http://www.commerce.state.mn.us
Phone Number: (651) 539-1500
general.commerce@state.mn.us

Type of Entity

Corporation

Business Management
Amy Blaess, BBB Main Contact Todd Johnson, President/Managing Director
Contact Information
Principal: Amy Blaess, BBB Main Contact
Business Category

Mortgage Brokers Mortgage Lender

Service Area
HomeServices Lending, LLC provides their services in AFTON, ALBERTVILLE, ANDOVER, ANOKA, APPLE VALLEY, ARDEN HILLS, BAYPORT, BELLE PLAINE, BETHEL, BIG LAKE, BISCAY, BLAINE, BLMNG PRAIRIE, BLOOMING PRAIRIE, BLOOMINGTON, BROOKLYN CENTER, BROOKLYN CTR, BROOKLYN PARK, BUFFALO, BURNS TOWNSHIP, BURNS TWNSHP, BURNSVILLE, CAMBRIDGE, CANNON FALLS, CENTERVILLE, CHAMPLIN, CHANHASSEN, CHASKA, CHISAGO CITY, CIRCLE PINES, COLLEGEVILLE, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, COLUMBIA HTS, COLUMBUS, COON RAPIDS, CORCORAN, COTTAGE GROVE, CROWN COLLEGE, CRYSTAL, DELANO, DELLWOOD, EAGAN, EAST BETHEL, EDEN PRAIRIE, EDEN VALLEY, EDINA, ELK RIVER, ELKO, ELKO NEW MARKET, ELKO NEW MRKT, EXCELSIOR, FALCON HEIGHTS, FALCON HGTS, FARIBAULT, FARMINGTON, FOREST LAKE, FRIDLEY, GLENCOE, GOLDEN VALLEY, GREENWOOD, HAM LAKE, HAMEL, HAMPTON, HANOVER, HASTINGS, HEIDELBERG, HILLTOP, HOPKINS, HOWARD LAKE, HUGO, HUTCHINSON, INDEPENDENCE, INVER GROVE, INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, JORDAN, LAKE CITY, LAKE ELMO, LAKEVILLE, LANDFALL VILLAGE, LANDFALL VLG, LAUDERDALE, LE SUEUR, LINO LAKES, LITTLE CANADA, LONG LAKE, LONSDALE, LORETTO, MAHTOMEDI, MANKATO, MAPLE GROVE, MAPLE LAKE, MAPLE PLAIN, MAPLEWOOD, MARINE ON SAINT CROIX, MARINE ST CRX, MEDICINE LAKE, MEDINA, MENDOTA, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MENDOTA HTS, MERIDEN, MINETONKA BCH, MINETONKA MLS, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNETNKA BCH, MINNETNKA MLS, MINNETONKA, MINNETONKA BEACH, MINNETONKA MILLS, MINNETRISTA, MONTEVIDEO, MONTGOMERY, MONTICELLO, MOUND, MOUNDS VIEW, MOUNDSVIEW, N SAINT PAUL, NEW BRIGHTON, NEW HOPE, NEW MARKET, NEW PRAGUE, NEW TRIER, NEWPORT, NO OAKS, NORTH BRANCH, NORTH MANKATO, NORTH OAKS, NORTH SAINT PAUL, NORTH ST PAUL, NORTHFIELD, NOWTHEN, OAK GROVE, OAK PARK HEIGHTS, OAK PARK HGTS, OAK PARK HTS, OAKDALE, ORONO, OSSEO, OTISCO, OTSEGO, OWATONNA, PINE SPRINGS, PLYMOUTH, PRIOR LAKE, RAMSEY, RANDOLPH, RED WING, RICHFIELD, ROBBINSDALE, ROCKFORD, ROGERS, ROSEMOUNT, ROSEVILLE, SAINT ANTHONY, SAINT BONIFACIUS, SAINT LOUIS PARK, SAINT PAUL, SAINT PAUL PARK, SAINT PETER, SAVAGE, SHAKOPEE, SHOREVIEW, SILVER CREEK, SOUTH SAINT PAUL, SOUTH ST PAUL, SPRING LAKE PARK, SPRING LK PK, SPRING PARK, ST ANTHNY VLG, ST ANTHONY, ST ANTHONY VILLAGE, ST BONIFACIUS, ST LOUIS PARK, ST PAUL PARK, STILLWATER, SUNFISH LAKE, VADNAIS HEIGHTS, VADNAIS HTS, VESELI, W LAKELAND, W SAINT PAUL, W ST PAUL, WACONIA, WADENA, WASECA, WAYZATA, WEBSTER, WEST LAKELAND, WEST SAINT PAUL, WEST ST PAUL, WHITE BEAR LAKE, WHITE BEAR LK, WHITE BEAR TOWNSHIP, WHITE BEAR TP, WOODBURY, YOUNG AMERICA & ZIMMERMAN, MN.
Alternate Business Names
Edina Realty Mortgage HomeServices Lending Long Mortgage Rector-Hayden Mortgage
Products & Services

According to the information provided by Edina Realty Mortgage/HomeServices Lending and services, this company offers mortgage lending.


Additional Locations

  • 333 S 7th St Fl 27

    Minneapolis, MN 55402

  • 5901 Golden Hills Dr #600

    Golden Valley, MN 55416 (866) 531-0904

  • 6800 France Ave S Ste 600

    Edina, MN 55435

X

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview


BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
Details

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

9/21/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Mortgage broker would not honor a rate lock agreement for 4.5% because he said his computer system erroneously populated the interest rate. The entire customer service experience working with mortgage office, Brian ********, and his superior, Lori ********, was terrible. In addition to having to navigate Brian's arrogant disposition and inaccurate answers to questions, the most salient of our complaints can be boiled down to 2 points: (1) Neither Brian nor Lori would honor the interest rate that was represented on the rate lock agreement that was provided to us, and (2) we were forced to pay for an inspection twice and have yet to be refunded from Home Services Lending. Rate Lock Agreement: On 7/22, Brian ******** forwarded a printed rate lock agreement - that he had signed - to my husband I representing a rate of 4.5%. Upon receipt of the agreement, my husband and I signed it and returned it to Brian via email within the next 2 days. After returning the document, my husband and I scheduled a conference call with Brian to answer some outstanding questions we had. During the course of the conversation, Brian kept re-iterating that our interest rate was 4.75%, not 4.5%. Upon terminating the call, we forwarded an email to Brian with the rate lock agreement attached showing a 4.5% rate and asked for an explanation as to why he kept saying our rate was 4.75%. Below is the email exchange. Please note that Brian decided to respond to the outlined questions in the email using all caps. In addition to the discrepancy in the interest rate documented in the rate lock agreement, you will note from the email exchange that the loan amount was incorrectly populated in this document as well: Brian, Still in a cloud of confusion. Please review the attached signed Rate Lock Agreement that was forwarded to you last Friday (7/24). As you can see, the "Principal Amount of Loan" is documented at $417K, and the "Initial Interest Rate" documented at 4.5%. FOR SOME REASON OUR ORIGINATION SOFTWARE HAD NOT UPDATED THE LOAN AMOUNT AND INTEREST RATE WHEN I PRINTED THE DISCLSOURE. THE CORRECT DISCLOSURE IS ATTACHED WHICH SHOWS THE RATE AND THE LENDER CREDIT. Based on our conversation today, you stated that our interest rate was locked at 4.75%. Can you explain why our locked rate is not 4.5% as is reflected in this document? BECAUSE YOU DON'T QUALIFY FOR A 4.5% RATE UNLESS YOU PAY DISCOUNT POINTS. Can you also advise why the principal amount of the loan is documented at $417K instead of $413,250? Was this a mistake, or was this intentional? A MISTAKE AS FOR SOME REASON OUR ORIGINATION SOFTWARE HAD NOT UPDATED THE LOAN AMOUNT AND INTEREST RATE WHEN I PRINTED THE DISCLSOURE Again, this document was sent and signed on 7/22, which was after the appraisal was completed on 7/7. REGARDLESS OF THE ERROR, WE CANNOT ORIGINATE A LOAN IN EXCESS OF 95% OF THE APPRAISAL VALUE. _____ Upon receiving this response, we attempted to escalate the issue to Brian's superior - Lori ********. Her response to our question about the discrepancy in the interest rate was as follows: "I am having someone look at this to see how that original lock sheet could have come out of our system. That does not seem to be the pricing at 4.5%." Despite the fact that there was an apparent computer error, neither Lori nor Bryan offered to honor the rate. In fact, neither of them even apologized for the error. Instead, we were forced to close on our home at 4.75% despite the fact that we signed - and Home Services Lending signed - a rate lock agreement with a 4.5% interest rate. Inspection Payment: Per Brian *******'s direction, we paid a personal check in the amount of $481 for an inspection prior to our closing date. Brian then included the $481 inspection costs as part of our closing costs. Since our closing date of 8/17, we have been attempting to recover this duplicate costs and have not yet recovered it.

Desired Settlement: Rate Lock Agreement: The difference in the 4.5% interest rate versus the 4.75% rate amounts to approximately $31/month. Multiplying $31/month over the life of the 30 year loan amounts to a cumulative sum of $11,160. We are requesting a reimbursement of $11,160 to account for the difference in the interest rates. Inspection Payment: We are requesting reimbursement of the duplicate payment in the amount of $481.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/10) */ The consumers, Mr. ************ and Ms.*****************, have requested two resolutions: 1) that HomeServices Lending, LLC reimburse Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** $11,160 for the difference in interest on a loan with an interest rate of 4.75% versus an interest rate of 4.5%; and 2) a reimbursement for $481 for duplicate costs. The second request has been resolved. HomeServices Lending, LLC is unable to comply with Mr. *****'s and Ms. ********'s first request for a reimbursement in the amount of $11,160. 2) A check for $481 was delivered and accepted by the consumer. Email correspondence was exchanged between Mr. ***** and Ms. Alexandra ****** on September 8th, 2015 at 10:43AM CDT--Mr. ***** acknowledged that a check for $481 was received by Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** over the preceding weekend. 1) The following are details regarding the interest rate lock: July 22, 2015: Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** signed a "Price Range Protection Confirmation/Rate Lock Agreement" ("Lock Agreement") detailing a principal loan amount of $417,000, an origination fee for $4,100, a loan term of 360 months, and an initial interest rate of 4.5%. The initial interest rate followed three asterisks--a note clearly stipulated the following, "Your note rate and discount points are subject to adjustment based on the risk factors of your mortgage application and credit profile as explained in Loan Pricing Disclosure." July 23, 2015: a new Good Faith Estimate ("GFE") was issued to Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** listing an interest rate of 4.75%, but it also included a credit to Mr. ***** and Ms. ********. The credit for interest rate chosen was in the sum of $2,582.81. This credit was explained to Mr. ***** and Ms. ********. Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** were also informed that they may still elect an interest rate of 4.5% so long as they were willing to pay the additional discount. Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** chose to not pay the origination fee detailed on the Lock Agreement, which prevented Mr. *****'s and Ms. ********'s application from locking at 4.5%. Because Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** lacked sufficient funds to close, the interest rate was increased to 4.75% on the GFE. On at least one occasion, Mr. *****'s and Ms. ********'s real estate agent, Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** themselves, and Ms. Lori ******** conferred via telephone to explain the 4.5% interest rate--should Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** have desired such a rate, it was elucidated that Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** would be required to pay a specific origination fee and forego the $2,582.81 credit for interest rate chosen. Thus, Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** were given separate financing options, they knew of the specific requirements for each choice, and Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** subsequently made an informed decision for the selection they chose to pursue. For these reasons, HomeServices Lending, LLC is unable to comply with Mr. *****'s and Ms. ********'s first request for a reimbursement in the amount of $11,160 In regard to Ms. ********'s accusations regarding the level of customer service communication provided by Mr. Brian ********, HomeServices Lending, LLC is unable to comment on any such subjective conclusions without supporting evidence. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/10) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) HomeServices Lending response to this complaint is unsurprisingly inaccurate, a customer experience we have come to expect from this company. Duplicate Payment: After submitting this complaint, my husband and I did receive reimbursement of the fees that HomeServices Lending overcharged us. Our request for resolution of that particular matter has been satisfied. Rate Lock: The justification for the discrepancy in the rate lock agreement is not only grossly inaccurate, but is is bordering on deceitful. As HomeServices Lending indicates in their response, my husband and I did sign a rate lock agreement for a principal loan amount of $417,000, an origination fee for $4,100, a loan term of 360 months, and an initial interest rate of 4.5% on 7/22/15. Despite Mortgage Officer Brian ******** also signing this document and affirming these mortgage conditions with his signature, HomeServices Lending would not honor the stipulations in this contract. In HomeServices Lending response to this complaint, they state that an asterick on the rate lock document "clearly stipulated the following, "Your note rate and discount points are subject to adjustment based on the risk factors of your mortgage application and credit profile as explained in Loan Pricing Disclosure." I am very interested in obtaining a clear and objective explanation as to what "risk factors" in our mortgage application and credit profile prompted the change in our mortgage rate, especially in light of the written admission from both Mortgage Officer Brian ******** and Branch Manager Lori ****** that the error occurred as a result of a HomeServices Lending computer system. This scapegoat justification of "risk factors" serving as the culprit for the change in our mortgage rate is not only illogical given the admissions from these company representatives, but this newly devised justification - which my husband and I have never heard until now - only serves to aggravate our building suspicion that there was malice intent regarding the handling of our file. HomeServices Lending ill-supported conjecture that the asterisk on the rate lock document provided them grounds to change the stipulations surrounding our rate lock agreement is in direct contradiction to what their own employees indicated - in writing. Please view the attached documents. In HomeServices Lending response, the company also indicated the following: "Because Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** lacked sufficient funds to close, the interest rate was increased to 4.75% on the GFE. We strongly object to the assertion that my husband and I "lacked sufficient funds to close." Not only is this statement wholly and fundamentally inaccurate, but we feel that this unsupported conclusion reached by HomeServices Lending is predicated on very troubling and subjective personal judgements. We never communicated lack of funds to close on our home. Never. We communicated to Mortgage Officer Brian ******** that any gaps in our available funds to cover closing costs would be covered by gifted funds from my parents. In fact, one of our largest customer service complaints against Brian was that we could not obtain a well-explained GFE regarding our closing costs in order to identify the amount of gifted funds that would be needed. We were wholly prepared, willing, ready and expecting to close our loan with the conditions outlined in the rate lock agreement that we signed. Any indication that the rate was altered "because" ofour lack of funds is deceitfully inaccurate. Once again, the explanation in HomeServices Lending response that the higher interest rate (4.75%) with the accompanying $2,582.81 credit was offered in response to our "lack of sufficient funds" is the first time we are hearing of such justification. This justification is terribly inaccurate and extremely troubling. Let me state again - we never - not one time - made any statement that we lacked funds to close. It was made explicitly clear to Mortgage Officer Brian ******** and Renovation Loan Specialist Haben ***** that gifted funds would cover the difference in our available funds. It was also made painstakingly clear that we wanted to proceed with our loan under the conditions for which we had signed the rate lock agreement. HomeServices Lending representing their actions of increasing our interest rate in exchange for a lender credit as a gesture of good faith is unbelievably deceitful. HomeServices Lending response also included the following statement: "a new Good Faith Estimate ("GFE") was issued to Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** listing an interest rate of 4.75%, but it also included a credit to Mr. ***** and Ms. ********. The credit for interest rate chosen was in the sum of $2,582.81. This credit was explained to Mr. ***** and Ms. ********. Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** were also informed that they may still elect an interest rate of 4.5% so long as they were willing to pay the additional discount. Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** chose to not pay the origination fee detailed on the Lock Agreement, which prevented Mr. *****'s and Ms. ********'s application from locking at 4.5%.This credit was explained to Mr. ***** and Ms. ********. Mr. ***** and Ms. ******** were also informed that they may still elect an interest rate of 4.5% so long as they were willing to pay the additional discount." Please be advised that HomeServices Lending statement above is - again - characteristically misleading. Contrary to the stipulations outlined in the signed rate rock agreement, Lori and Brian would not honor them and subsequently only made the 4.5% interest rate available to us if we paid additional discount points. Let me reiterate - the rate lock agreement that was signed by both parties on 7/22 locked in a rate of 4.5% without any consideration or payment of discount monies. My husband and I simply wanted to proceed with the stipulations as outlined in the rate lock contract that we had signed. HomeServices Lending would not honor their own document. None of the subsequent options that they offered us were as favorable as the rate lock agreement that we signed. We re-assert our request for reimbursement of $11,160 based on the admitted error on the part of HomeServices Lending's representative. We are completely appalled at the assertion that the discrepancy regarding this rate lock was caused by anything other than their own professional liability. We would like to resolve this matter amicably and in absence of litigation. We feel that we have provided a very logical explanation supporting our request. Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/09/21) */ ***response has been scanned in and converted to text below (original document is available using the online complaint system). HomeServices Lending, LLC ("HSL*) is in receipt of additional correspondence dated Sept. 10, 2015, regarding the abovereferenced matter (the "Complaint"). As an accredited Business of the Better Business Bureau ("BBB"), HSL is pleased to provide to the BBB its supplementary response to the Complaint, HSL has reviewed the additional information Ms. ******** and Mr. ***** (the "Consumers") have presented in connection with the Complaint, and is happy to present our position. The fundamental details, as we understand them, are summarized as follows: On July 22, 2015, a rate lock agreement documenting a loan amount of $47,000 with a 4.5% interest rate, with no origination credit, was disclosed to the Consumers and HSL. The next day (July 23, 2015) a Good Faith Estimate (GFE) was re-disclosed to the Consumers detailing a new loan amount of $413,250, the loan was not relocked but amended to an interest rate of 4.75%, now with an origination credit of $2066.25. Additionally on this date, a new Truth-in-Lending (TIL) disclosure was provided to the Consumers illustrating an interest rate of 4,75%. As further acknowledgement, and to confirm the information previously delivered on July 23, 2015, a new rate lock agreement was delivered to the Consumers on July 27, 2015, again reiterating the loan amount of $413,250, interest rate of 4.75% and origination credit of $2,066.25. At the loan closing on August 17, 2015, the Consumers signed the HUD-1 Settlement Statement, final 1003 application form and TIL containing the same loan terms as previously disclosed: principal amount of loan $413,250, interest rate of 4.75% and origination credit of $2,066.25. During the time period from July 23, 2015 to the closing of the mortgage on August 17, 2015, Mr. ******** and Ms. ******** discussed the same updated loan information and pricing options via telephone and email on multiple occasions. Based upon the information presented, HSL denies any and all allegations and assertions contained in the Complaint which assert HSL must honor the 4.5% interest rate. All disclosures provided to the Consumers were compliant with federal and state mortgage lending requirements, and which provided the Consumers the sufficient time to review the loan documentation. To reiterate, the Consumers were provided updated disclosures in a timely manner and were afforded ample time to review the available financing options before making their choice. No documentation has been submitted, and no evidence presented, that in any way evidences the validity of the Complaint. Nor has any documentation been submitted, and no evidence presented, that indicates HSL did not conduct itself in an ethical or professional fashion, or is in any way responsible for any wrongdoing. It appears that the parties adhered to the terms and conditions contained in the final mortgage closing documents, and that the actions and conduct of HSL, and its employees, were both reasonable and customary. We thank you for bringing this matter to our attention,

7/10/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: We were supposed to have the buyers of our house close on May 22. The buyers were offered a first time home buyer loan by homeservices lending llc. The loan was rejected because they didn't qualify a little over a week before May 22. The buyers were then offered another loan that they qualified for, but because the appraisal wasn't done 2 days prior to May 22 we were unable to close. We were told the appraisal was completed, but obviously it wasn't. Our realtor has contacted homeservices lending multiple times, but with little or no response. We still don't know whether an appraisal was done and approved, and what day the closing will be completed. We must close on our house before we can purchase our next house. I've wasted at least a day of rescheduling deliveries, utilities, and movers because I haven't received a scheduled closing date.

Desired Settlement: DesiredSettlementID: Other (requires explanation) DesiredSettlementID: Refund I would like this business to fully refund our whole house moving expenses. We will more than likely have to use a different moving company than our original because of scheduling availability. I would also like any interest rate increases to our loan be refunded from the locked in interest rate that we would have received if we closed on May 22.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/25) */ ***response has been scanned in and converted to text below (original document is available using the online complaint system). HomeServices Lending, LLC (HSL) is in receipt of your letter dated June , 2015, regarding the abovereferenced matter (the Complaint). As an accredited Business of the Better Business Bureau (BBB), HSL is pleased to provide to the BBB a response to the Complaint, HSL has reviewed the information Mr.******************* (Seller) has presented in connection with the Complaint, and is now able to provide an explanation of our position. The facts, as we understand them, are Summarized as follows: o The purchasesale contract associated with the loan transaction for ************* (Buyer), dated March 27, 2015, indicated an anticipated closing dateof May 22, 2015. The underwriting review on May 11, 2015, indicated a bond program loan would not be available. On May 12, 2015, the loan type was altered with both buyer and sellers made aware of this changes. Additionally on May 12, 2015, Buyer and Seller were informed that the closing date could vary based on the conversion of the appraisal. On May 15, 2015, a new appraisal was ordered. Underwriting approval for the loan was obtained on May 18, 2015. Property inspection was scheduled for May 19, 2015, the report returned with errors on May 21, 2015. The corrected appraisal was received on May 27, 2015. Final loan approval was received on May 28, 2015. The loan closed on May 29, 2015. Based upon the information presented, HSL denies any and all allegations and assertions contained in the Complaint which assert HSLs lack of communication and delayed closing date damaged the Seller in any way. There is no privity of contract between HSL and Seller, as the transaction in question relates to the mortgage loan between HSL and Buyer. HSL worked diligently to obtain the required documents, in order to align with the anticipated closing date, with numerous attempts made to expedite the appraisal process. During this transaction, HSL personally contacted the Buyer, Buyers real estate agent and Sellers real estate agent. HSL directly contacted the Sellers to provide updates of the situation, in addition to contacting the Sellers fender and negotiated a free rate extension for the Seller. The Buyers loan closed on May 29, 2015, well within a reasonable period of time following the anticipated closing date." No documentation has been submitted, and no evidence presented, that in any way evidences the validity of the Sellers alleged damage. Nor has any documentation been submitted, and no evidence presented, that indicates HSL did not conduct itself in a timely fashion, or is in any way responsible for any wrongdoing. It appears that the parties (HSL and Buyer) adhered to the terms and conditions contained in the purchase agreement, and that the actions and conduct of HSL, and its employee, were both reasonable and customary. There were no contractual obligations between HSL and Seller. It is the goal of HSL to deliver an unrivaled mortgage experience, and make every effort to meet all customer expectations. HSL appreciates that Mr. *********** has taken the time to communicate his dissatisfaction with the experience, HSL considers the comments, both good and bad, of all its customers and third parties to be valuable feedback, which HSL takes very seriously, HSL only desires to address the needs of our buyers, and provide to each of them, the best mortgage solution available to meet their needs. We thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Sincerely,

7/10/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Champion Title does not tell you the full info and they just want to shove settlements threw to pad their numbers for the month. There was an issue that came up for settling on my house. I was the seller. I had no knowledge that my property had a front footage assessment. And they told me when we walked in time of settlement. They knew about it weeks before and never told me about anything. Then after I settled on it just electing to pay what was owed, I dug to the bottom of this. Then I (on my own) uncovered that there was front footage due up until 2013 not for 2014 or 2015. Champion Title told me " they contacted the front footage company and said that it was due for 2014 and 2015 and someone paid 2014" So I had to write a check outside of settlement to the buy for the one year. After I did research myself I came up that there was no front footage due for 2014 and 2015 and this was told to the title company by the front footage company. They (champion Title) tried to sweep this under the rug and not communicate this to me. Then when I called them they said they charged me because public record stated that it ended in 2015 not 2013. But they knew that there was a discrepancy between the ending date with what was recorded and what was actual. Again they knew about this before settlement and never told me anything about the issue and about working threw it after settlement. They again tried to keep things quiet and not tell me anything about it. Its been a week and they owe me a partial refund since they charged me wrongfully. I had to do all this myself and they never contacted me at all about the issues and if they were working threw it.

Desired Settlement: I need a 96 dollar refund from them. They charged me wrongfully without explaining the details. They basically lied to me and tried to shove it all under the rug and hope it flew by. They should be reprimanded for this action. This is not how you grow a customer base and due your settlement work correctly. I am also due a refund by them as well.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 10, 2015/06/25) */ Per our conversation can you please contact the consumer and see if they have an address that was directly associated with this transaction at Champion Title? We are unable to locate this Seller or address on the complaint in our system, we would need more information to complete our research.

2/24/2015 Billing/Collection Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: The closing date on the purchase of our home was delayed 3 days due to lack of communication between our Home Mortgage Consultant & the VA. Our Home Mortgage Consultant ******************'s lack of communication caused us to have extra expenses related to the recent purchase of our home ****************, Omaha, NE 68152. Our closing was initially scheduled for 10/20/2014, but was delayed 3 days due to miscommunication between ******** and the VA. (Our loan was a VA Loan.) As late as 2 days before our scheduled closing the VA was still completing my Employment Verification. I was nervous this was close to closing but was assured by ******* we'd still close as scheduled on Monday October 20th, but later in the day and that she did not need anything further from me. My Real Estate agent informed me Sunday the 19th that our closing would be delayed longer. I tried to contact ****************** to find out what was holding things up and see if I could do anything to help. She was very unresponsive, not answering my phone calls or responding to emails over a 3 day period. On Monday she only answered her phone late in the day. I did not hear from her at all on Tuesday despite my requests for an update. Wednesday morning she finally requested documents from me for the VA. I provided them and she said she would let me know when the VA received them. Again, I didn't hear from her until close to 6PM and only because I repeatedly called her cell phone because I needed to know if/when we were closing Thursday so I could re-schedule movers etc... I ended up working with my Real Estate agent to figure out which employment verification the VA needed, contacted the VA myself, and got it resolved without ******************'s help. They simply needed employment verification from one of my previous employers. ******* had completely dropped the ball on this. She did not contact the VA or me to get the correct information to the VA. This delay caused us to have $900.02 in extra expenses related to truck rental, hiring movers etc.. We had closed on schedule on October 20th on our previous home and had nowhere to stay and all of our belongings were in renal trucks. I can provide itemized receipts for these expenses. I requested reimbursement from ******** and her boss ***************. They both replied saying they were working with their boss on it. I have never heard back from either of them despite my repeated emails and phone calls. They are basically ignoring me. I can provide emails if need be.

Desired Settlement: Reimbursement of expenses related to the delay in our closing. 3 extra days of moving truck expenses. And we had to hire movers. See below for details: Budget Truck 1: 3 extra days @ 47.99 143.97 Extra 15 miles @ .69/mile 10.35 3 extra days of Cost Recovery Fee 10.50 3 extra days of Energy Recovery Fee 0.38 7% sales tax 11.56 Truck 1 Total 176.76 Budget Truck 2: 3 extra days @ 50.66 $151.98 Extra 15 miles @ .69/mile $10.35 3 extra days of Cost Recovery Fee $10.50 3 extra days of Energy Recovery Fee $0.38 7% Sales Tax $12.12 Truck 2 Total $185.33 Movers: Two Men & A Truck - Unloading 5 hours 537.93 GRAND TOTAL $900.02

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/02/12) */ February 12, 2015 Mr. *********** Mediation Coordinator Better Business Bureau of Minnesota and North Dakota 220 S. River Ridge Cir Burnsville, MN 55337 Re: Case # ********: ****** ****** Dear Mr. ******: HomeServices Lending, LLC ("HSL") is in receipt of your letter dated February 2, 2015, regarding the above-referenced matter (the "Complaint"). As an accredited Business of the Better Business Bureau ("BBB"), HSL is pleased to provide to the BBB a response to the Complaint. HSL has reviewed the information Ms. ****** ****** ("Buyer") has presented in connection with the Complaint, and is now able to provide an explanation of our position. The facts, as we understand them, are summarized as follows: The purchase/sale contract associated with this loan transaction, dated September 18, 2014, indicated an "anticipated closing date" of October 20, 2014. On October 15, 2014 the mortgage loan originator was contacted by the loan underwriter seeking clarification of Co-Borrowers employment history. The initial form 1003 signed and dated by the Borrower, October 2, 2014, reflected the Co-Borrowers current employer and previous employer listed under the Borrowers' employment information. October 16, 2014, Credco encounters a delay in verification of employment from Borrowers employers. Appraisal for property was reviewed on October 17, 2014 by HSL underwriter who requested corrections (appraisal was completed subject to completion). Buyer was aware as of October 17, 2014 that employment had not been verified by those sources provided by Buyer. The Buyer's realtor also communicated the delay to Buyer on October 19, 2014. Buyers chose to proceed with closing on existing property with full knowledge their purchase loan closing would be moved, pending receipt of the additional documentation. HSL again contacted all employers directly to resolve verification of employment requirements on October 20, 2014 Updated appraisal and final inspection regarding subject property is received by HSL on October 20, 2014. Mortgage loan originator contacted Buyer for additional items needed to close, including adequate documentation of unemployment gap, on October 22, 2014. October 22, 2014 HSL sent HUD and instructions to title company for loan closing. October 23, 2014 HSL provided final documents to Title Company. Buyer's loan closed. The following dates represent completed milestones in HSLs loan process regarding the Buyer's loan: September 18, 2014 - Purchase Contract was executed indicating "approximate closing date of 10/20/2014" October 15, 2015 - Co-Borrower employment history identified on initial 1003 October 17, 2014 - HSL advises Buyer of outstanding verification of employment October 19, 2014 - Buyers realtor notifies Buyer closing will be delayed October 20, 2014 - Buyers proceed with closing on existing property October 20, 2014 - HSL receives final home inspection October 22, 2014 - Documentation requested to address Buyers employment gaps and recent credit transactions. October 23, 2014 - Buyer's loan closes Based upon the information presented, HSL denies any and all allegations and assertions contained in the Complaint which assert HSL's lack of communication damaged the Buyer in any way. HSL worked diligently to obtain the required documents, ranging from employment and financial statements to final home inspections, in order to align with the anticipated closing date. As a direct result of circumstances within Buyer's control, but completely outside the control of HSL, the Buyer's loan closed on October 23, 2014, well within a reasonable period of time following the "anticipated closing date." No documentation has been submitted, and no evidence presented, that in any way evidences the validity of the Buyer's alleged "damage". Nor has any documentation been submitted, and no evidence presented, that indicates HSL did not conduct itself in a timely fashion, or is in any way responsible for any wrongdoing. It appears that the parties adhered to the terms and conditions contained in the purchase agreement, and that the actions and conduct of HSL, and its employee, were both reasonable and customary. It is the goal of HSL to deliver an unrivaled mortgage experience, and make every effort to meet all customer expectations. HSL appreciates that Ms. ****** has taken the time to communicate her dissatisfaction with the experience. HSL considers the comments, both good and bad, of all its customers to be valuable feedback, which HSL takes very seriously. HSL only desires to address the needs of our buyers, and provide to each of them, the best mortgage solution available to meet their needs. Because HSL values each customer, and because HSL desires that each customer's experience be unrivaled, HSL has contacted Ms. ****** directly. HSL is pleased to advise the BBB that an amicable resolution to the Complaint has been reached. We thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.

12/5/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: HomeServices Lending has not reviewed my mortgage application in a timely manner. I have been working with HomeLending Services to obtain a FHA loan in order to purchase a home. The purchase contact had an anticipated closing date of November 21, 2014. The seller requested only a 20 day due diligence period putting the end of the due diligence period at November 11, 2014. This being the time I had to get any inspections done and obtain my financing. After being told by my realtor, ************, that she and ************* did not foresee any issue with the shorter due diligence period, I agreed. On October 29, 2014, I was informed by the mortgage consultant, *************, that my loan was sent to the underwriting department. After not hearing any updates for a week. Starting on November 3, 2014 I was told I should hear from underwriting at any moment. That my loan was good and they did not expect any issues. November 10, 2014, underwriting still had not reviewed my loan and I was told they needed me to agree to extend the due diligence to November 13, 2014. I was also told the evening of November 10, 2014 that the listing agent had not been able to reach the seller to find out if she also agreed to extending the due diligence period. It was explained to me that my $900 earnest money would be forfeit if the underwriter denied my loan or I canceled after 5 PM on the last day of the due diligence period. The morning of November 11, 2014, ************* again told me that the underwriter would look at my loan that day. A few hours later, ************ contacted me stating the seller agreed to extend the due diligence period. On November 12, 2014, underwriting still has not reviewed my loan. It seems unethical that HomeServices Lending is able to jeopardize causing a person to lose their earnest money as they are doing. Furthermore, On November 7, 2014, at the direction of the apartment management company I rent through, I have already given notice that I will be moving out. So not only is HomeServices Lending risking my money, they are also putting me at risk of being homeless.

Desired Settlement: I want HomeServices Lending to review my loan in a timely manner. If I lose my $900 earnest money, I want to be compensated the funds and any relocation expenses that occur due to having to find a new place to live at such short notice.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/11/24) */ HomeServices Lending, LLC ("HSL") is in receipt of your letter dared November 13, 2014, regarding the above referenced Complaint (the "Complaint"). As an accredited Business of the Better Business Bureau ("BBB"), HSL is pleased to provide to the BBB a response to the Complaint. HSL has reviewed the information the BBB has presented in connection with the Complaint, and is now able to provide an explanation of our position. It is understanding that the Complaint is based upon the actions of HSL, including those of one of its employees, Ms. ***** ******* HSL Home Mortgage Consultant (the "HMC"). Specifically, that HSL did not review Ms. ***** *******'s (the "Buyer") application for an FHA home mortgage loan in what the BUyer descrives as a "timely manner." (It is noted that HSL is not aware of any familial relationship between the HMC and the Buyer.) The facts as we understand them, are summarized in this following timeline: October 17, 2014-The Buyer's loan application for FHA home mortgage loan financing was initiated with the HMC. October 20, 2014-The Buyer was pre-qualified for home financing. The purchase contract associated with this transaction, dated October 20, 2014, indicated an "anticipated closing date" of November 21, 2014. It should also be noted that the original closing date requested was November 24, 2014. The Buyer than changed the day to November 21, 2014, as the attorney with whom the transaction was associated would not be in the office on November 24, 2014. An initial due-diligence period of twenty (20) days was indicated, which Was to end November 11, 2014. The twenty (20) day due-diligence period was to be utilized for inspections, obtaining financing, etc. The Buyer's REALTOR, Peyton Thorp (the "Realtor), informed the Buyer that the Realtor did not anticipate any issues involving the short due-diligence period, following discussions with the HMC. On October 2014, the HMC informed the Buyer that the loan had been submitted to HSL underwriting. The buyer indicated that she did not receive any further updates for (5) days, ending November 3, 2014. HSL notes that as October 29, 2014, was a Wednesday, and November 3, 2014, was a Monday, this is not unusual. , The Buyer stated that on November 3, 2014, "I was told I should hear from underwriting at any moment. That my loan was good and they did not expect any issues" On November 10, 2014, the Realtor and the HMC advised the Buyer that her loan had not been reviewed as yet, and suggested that the Buyer, for her own protection agree to seek an extension of the due-diligence period through November 13, 2014. 0n November 11, 2014, the HMC contacted the Buyer to inform her that underwriting was to review her loan same day. The Realtor also contacted tho Buyer later that same day to inform The Buyer that the sellers of the property had agreed to an extension of the due-diligence period. The Buyer claimed that prior to the end of the due-diligence period "On November 12, 2014, underwriting still has not reviewed my loan." The Buyer than alleged that somehow this placed her at risk: It seems unethical that HomeServices Lending is able to jeopardize causing a person to lose their earnest money as they are doing. Furthermore, On November 2014, at the direction of the apartment management company I rent through I have already given notice that I will be moving out. So not only is HomeServices Lengl'mgv risking my money, they am also putting me at risk of being homeless." The following dates represent completed milestones in HSUs FHA loan process regarding the Buyer's loan: October Z7, 2014-Buyer's loan was received by HSDS fulfillment center. October 28, 2014-Buyer's loan was submitted to underwriting. November 13, 2014-Buyer's loan was approved by underwriting, with conditions. November 19; 2014Buyer was informed by the HMC that her loan was in final approval with HSL' s closing department. The Buyer was to meet with the Realtor that afternoon for a final Walk-through. November 21, 2014 - Buyer's loan closed. Based upon the facts presented, HSL denies any and all allegations and assertions contained in the Complaint. The Buyer's loan closed on November 21, 2014, the date reflected in the original purchase contract as the "anticipated closing date." To reiterate,the Buyer's loan closed as agreed, and in alignment with federal requirements under Regulation B that provide for the rendering of mortgage decisions Within 30 calendar days of a completed application. As the Complaint clearly demonstrates, the Buyer has assumed facts that have not been established, and which have no foundation or merit. No documentation has been submitted, and no evidence presented, that in any way evidences the validity of the Buyer's alleged "risk" Nor has any documentation been submitted, and no evidence presented, that indicates HSL did not conduct itself in a timer fashion, or is in any way responsible for any wrongdoing. It appears that the parties adhered to the terms and conditions contained in the purchase agreement, and the actions and conduct of HSL, and its employee, were both reasonable and customary, The loan closed not only as agreed, but as anticipated. Our determination is based upon the information currently available to HSL. If you are aware of facts that might alter the above analysis or conclusion, please provide that information to HSL at your earliest convenience, and the matter will be reviewed. Further, if there has been a misunderstanding as to the nature of the Complaint, please advise HSL, and the matter will be reconsidered. Should you have any questions, need any additional information, or wish to speak with someone directly at HSL, please do not hesitate to contact me via telephone at XXX-XXX-XXXX or email at ***********@homeserviceslending.com. HSL gives serious consideration to each and every complaint brought against HSL, or one of our employees, and we appreciate you drawing our attention to this matter. We thank you for your patience. Sincerely, **** S. ******* **** S.******* l President


Customer Review(s)

The customer review(s) below are un-filtered. These positive and negative reviews are not used in the calculation of the BBB Rating. If you wish to file a complaint and request a resolution to your issue please click here. This customer review section is not BBBs complaint resolution system. Customer Reviews are the subjective opinion of the individual who posted the review and not of Better Business Bureau. A customer review is not posted on a business if a BBB complaint on the same issue(s) is also filed. BBB cannot guarantee the accuracy of any customer review and is not responsible for the content of any customer review. Public comments are not customer reviews.

Customer Reviews Summary

0 Customer Reviews on HomeServices Lending, LLC
Positive Experience (0 reviews)
Neutral Experience (0 reviews)
Negative Experience (0 reviews)