Chicago Mortgage Acceptance, Chicago, IL - trouble with home refinance

Chicago Mortgage Acceptance, Chicago, IL - trouble with home refinance

Consumer follow-up message - June 16, 2004 - From:

This correspondence has been sent to www.complaints.com as a follow-up to my original complaint to www.complaints.com on December 12, 2003. June 9, 2004 Consumer Services/Real Estate

Office of Banks and Real Estate

Mr. D. Lorenzo Padron

Mr. David Espinoza

310 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 2130

Chicago, Illinois 60604-4278 Mr. Padron: I have been in touch with someone that attempted to get employment with Chicago Mortgage Acceptance (CMA). The person who applied for the job was very disappointed in the professionalism of CMA. This has prompted me to put the reply I received from CMA on www.complaints.com. I submitted my complaint about CMA on December 12, 2003. I contacted the Office of Banks and Real Estate regarding my issues. Director of Consumer Services Mr. David Espinoza of the Office of Banks and Real Estate handled my complaint. He did a very poor job, and may be guilty of leaning in favor of a company that lies about its practices. Without laboring the issues, I want to point out one response CMA made to the Office of Banks and Real Estate that was an outright lie. In a letter written by Mr. Matthew J. Lanfear dated February 12, 2004 to the Office of Banks and Real Estate, it reports an outright lie in the 4th paragraph. I contested this lie and Mr. Espinoza of the Office of Banks and Real Estates did nothing about it. The 4th paragraph states, "additionally Mr. Nance did not have a Bankruptcy on his Credit report as of late October. By December a Bankruptcy had appeared on Mr. Nance's credit, which he was completely aware of. This Bankruptcy completely killed any chance there was in closing the loan...." This is an outright lie. I have never filed for Bankruptcy. There could not have been a Bankruptcy on my credit report if I have never filed for Bankruptcy. CMA lied when they reported to the Office of Banks and Real Estate that I had prior knowledge of a Bankruptcy on my credit report. The Office of Banks and Real Estate never contested this lie I made Mr. Espinoza aware of. CMA never brought this to my attention. If CMA had informed me that I had a Bankruptcy on my credit report, CMA and I could have investigated this issue and found it to be untrue. CMA submitted this lie to cover the deceit I reported on December 12, 2003. I brought this to the attention of Mr. Espinoza and he did nothing about it. Not only did CMA lie to the Office of Banks and Real Estate about me and a Bankruptcy, they were also late in responding to the Office of Banks and Real Estate's mandated response time. Nothing was done to CMA regarding their late response time. The Office of Banks and Real Estate sent me a letter dated February 25, 2004, a day after CMA responded. I guess an investigation does not take a long time with the Office of Banks and Real Estate. It appears the Office of Banks and Real Estate took everything CMA said to be gospel, and did not even investigate whether I had a valid Bankruptcy on my credit report. There should be a public outcry. If this happened to me, it has happened to others. Mr. Espinoza was negligent in his duties to investigate my charges and response by CMA. The letter dated February 25, 2004 sent by the Office of Banks and Real Estate reads in part as follows: "Although the Office of Banks and Real Estate reviews all complaints involving the entities that we regulate, we are not able to resolve all concerns...CMA conveyed that you were referred to a company that arbitrates reduction of credit obligations, but had no affiliation or responsibility to that company's success in its negotiations...Our review determines compliance to rules within our jurisdiction, including rules of the Residential Mortgage License Act of 1987 (Act). CMA stated that it could not secure refinancing for you because your Loan to Value was not acceptable to the prospective lenders. Each entity has its own criteria in which a borrower must qualify, and your loan application must meet qualifications of each lender to which the mortgage broker submits your application. CMA submitted signed documents that indicated your awareness of the original terms of the loan, and a Denial Notice specifying the reasons for the denial. However, it appears Chicago Mortgage Acceptance failed to demonstrate your awareness of changes as the loan progressed. Therefore, by copy of this letter, we refer Chicago Mortgage Acceptance to the rules of the Act that addresses: Changes Affecting Loans in Process, Section 1050.1230; and Good Faith Requirements, Section 1050.1250. Be assured that a copy of your complaint will be maintained in our records to monitor the development of a pattern of a similar complaint with this company regarding the above-cited rules. We appreciated your report of this issue. However, this office can take no further action at this time. Thank you bringing this matter to our attention." There is no mention of the lie reported by CMA regarding a Bankruptcy on my credit report. As you can read, there was nothing substantive addressed in this response or in the Office Banks and Real Estate's investigation relating to the overwhelming complaint issues raised. This letter was signed Virginia Calvin, Consumer Services Administrator. She sent a copy to Matthew J. Lanfear, Managing Director, Chicago Mortgage Acceptance MB.0006571, 435 N. LaSalle, Suite 100, Chicago, Illinois, 60610. If there is anyone out there who knows a lawyer that will take this case, I will be ever grateful to you for the referral. You can bet there are others out there with similar issues. On March 3, 2004 I received an email regarding Chicago Mortgage Acceptance Corporation. It states as follows: "Fred, thanks for the advice. Can you please tell me how you got your ratings on the search engines so high? OBRE (Office of Banks and Real Estate) might actually be able to help me with my problem. My problem is real estate related...Okay I probably shouldn't say this but I actually used to work for CMA and wish to remain anonymous. The company is owned by Extreme Traffic Builders they are on the 4th floor. The company probably has several lawsuits against them for various reasons. It is my guess that the company will probably change their name in the next 6 months. Especially with your report online. I can't say for sure. Their whole business and marketing plan is basically a scandal. They send out these deceptive mailers for FHA refunds and then turn the customer to refinance. Don comes from the car sales business so he believes in "turning" all his customers. They send out coupons for $2495 off closing costs for purchasing homes. The customers are then charged a higher up front fee as well as a higher rate. They also send out other fictitious mailers. They basically try to prey on the uneducated consumer and try to take full advantage of them. (Primarily Spanish speaking). As for filing a lawsuit, I would encourage you to do so, but I really don't think you will get very far with it. Just stay on OBRE. Talk to some real estate attorneys and ask them if they know any LITIGATORS. I wouldn't spend too much of my own money on this but if you can find an attorney to do it for free, then by all means try it. The reason I say this is because...I don't think there have been any cases like this yet so you might actually be making new law which would bring the attorney lots of publicity. Remember you get what you pay for though...Another bad marketing piece is the 1.25% interest rate. It is not the interest rate but yet they push it. GOOD LUCK and keep me posted...p.s. their loan officers are not very well trained...I know other people have complained to OBRE about CMA, are they responsive or is there a lot of red tape." This is the response I got from an email about my CMA complaint. Need I say more? The Office of Banks and Real Estate is covering up for CMA. If there are other complaints. Why aren't they acting? If there is anyone out there with an attorney’s name who would be willing to look over my complete set of documentation, I would really appreciate a call or contact by mail. I don't expect the Office of Banks and Real Estate to take any further action. I want to talk to a lawyer about the Office of Banks and Real Estate's non-action techniques. Please respond. I welcome all emails and telephone calls. Thank you. Fred L. Nance Jr., ABA, MA, CADC

17239 Evans Avenue

South Holland, Illinois 60473

708-339-6737 or 38 (home)

708-921-1395 (cell) cc: Mr. Don Druse, President This is the response to my letter of June 10, 2004 to the Office of Banks and Real Estate regarding my allegation that Chicago Mortgage Acceptance falsely reported a Bankruptcy to a lender. I am quoting the response from the Office of Banks and Real Estate. 6/11/2004 Fred Nance Jr.

17239 Evans Avenue File Number: 2003-24017

South Holland, Il. 60473-3436 Re: Chicago Mortgage Acceptance MB.0006571 Dear Mr. Nance: The Consumer Services Division acknowledges receipt of your rebuttal correspondence received June 10, 2004, addressed to Commissioner Padron and Director Espinoza. This correspondence reiterated our response to your original complaint, and the response from Chicago Mortgage Acceptance (CMA). It presented a new allegation that Chicago Mortgage Acceptance erroneously reported a Bankruptcy, which may have affected the lender’s decision to deny your loan. After acquisition of additional documentation from CMA, and consultation with several Office of Banks and Real Estate staff (including legal counsel), it is determined that we do not have circumstances to re-open our review of your file. Although we review all complaints received, all concerns are not resolved through our process. This office has authority to monitor compliance to rules that govern those that we license. However, our legislated rules cannot be applied to all areas of a loan process. A violation of rules subjects the licensee to a reprimand of its license. When fines or other forms of reproof are instituted, they are internal matters between the licensee, and this regulating office. They are not public record, and do not require communication with the consumer. If restitution or restoration is an expectation, you may wish to seek assistance through a legal setting. Credit-reporting bureaus may assist with credit repair or credit report disputes. This State of Illinois office is not permitted to settle private legal, or private contractual disputes on either party’s behalf. Again, we appreciate your report, and be assured that a copy of your complaint will be maintained in our records to monitor the development of a pattern of a similar complaint with this company regarding the rules previously cited. Thank you for your interest. Sincerely, Virginia Calvin

Consumer Services Administrator Enclosure

C: Chicago Mortgage Acceptance

Attn: Matthew Lanfear

435 N. LaSalle, Suite 100

Chicago, Illinois 60610 My, Fred Nance Jr., response: I have not recovered from the deliberate and malicious actions of Chicago Mortgage Acceptance, for example, Chase Bank has charged my account more than $1500.00 of late fees and interest. I am not able to pay anything on the bill. Chase wants me to pay a minimum of about $1000.00 a month. If I pay $125.00 a month it all goes to interest. I need legal assistance. Is there anyone out there who can assist me with litigating this issue against Chicago Mortgage Acceptance. The operation of the Office of Banks and Real Estate does not appear to assist the consumer. If their reprimand of Chicago Mortgage Acceptance does not rise to a level of alerting public, then if fails to assist the consumer with information to make good decisions dealing with entities it monitors. Why is there monitoring needed if the consumer does not know the outcome. This is a ludicrous. Something must be done about both entities. Change needs to take place. Anyone there listening. How do we march on? How does my family get relief for our suffering? I want to sue Chicago Mortgage Acceptance. Who has the referral? Thanks. Fred Nance Jr.

708-339-6737 (home)

708-921-1395 (cell)

Fred L. Nance Jr., M.A., CADC

17239 Evans Avenue

South Holland, Illinois 60473

708-339-6737 or 38 (home)

708-921-1395 (cell)

Consumer follow-up message - June 15, 2004 - From:

This is the response to my letter of June 10, 2004 to the Office of Banks and Real Estate regarding my allegation that Chicago Mortgage Acceptance falsely reported a Bankruptcy to a lender. I am quoting the response from the Office of Banks and Real Estate. 6/11/2004 Fred Nance Jr.

17239 Evans Avenue File Number: 2003-24017

South Holland, Il. 60473-3436 Re: Chicago Mortgage Acceptance MB.0006571 Dear Mr. Nance: The Consumer Services Division acknowledges receipt of your rebuttal correspondence received June 10, 2004, addressed to Commissioner Padron and Director Espinoza. This correspondence reiterated our response to your original complaint, and the response from Chicago Mortgage Acceptance (CMA). It presented a new allegation that Chicago Mortgage Acceptance erroneously reported a Bankruptcy, which may have affected the lender's decision to deny your loan. After acquisition of additional documentation from CMA, and consultation with several Office of Banks and Real Estate staff (including legal counsel), it is determined that we do not have circumstances to re-open our

review of your file. Although we review all complaints received, all concerns are not resolved through our process. This office has authority to monitor compliance to rules that govern those that we license. However, our legislated rules cannot be applied to all areas of a loan process. A violation of rules subjects the licensee to a reprimand of its license. When fines or other forms of reproof are instituted, they are internal

matters between the licensee, and this regulating office. They are not public record, and do not require communication with the consumer. If restitution or restoration is an expectation, you may wish to seek assistance through a legal setting. Credit-reporting bureaus may assist with credit repair or credit report disputes. This State of Illinois office

is not permitted to settle private legal, or private contractual disputes on either party's behalf. Again, we appreciate your report, and be assured that a copy of your complaint will be maintained in our records to monitor the development of a pattern of a similar complaint with this company regarding the rules previously cited. Thank you for your interest. Sincerely, Virginia Calvin

Consumer Services Administrator Enclosure C: Chicago Mortgage Acceptance

Attn: Matthew Lanfear

435 N. LaSalle, Suite 100

Chicago, Illinois 60610 My, Fred N Jr., response: I have not recovered from the deliberate and malicious actions of Chicago Mortgage Acceptance, for example, Chase Bank has charged my account more than $1500.00 of late fees and interest. I am not able to pay anything on the bill. Chase wants me to pay a minimum of about $1000.00 a month. If I pay $125.00 a month it all goes to interest. I need legal assistance. Is there anyone out there who can assist me with litigating this issue against Chicago Mortgage Acceptance. The operation of the Office of Banks and Real Estate does not appear to assist the consumer. If their reprimand of Chicago Mortgage Acceptance does not rise to a level of alerting public, then if fails to assist the

consumer with information to make good decisions dealing with entities it monitors. Why is there monitoring needed if the consumer does not know the outcome. This is a ludicrous. Something must be done about both entities. Change needs to take place. Anyone there listening. How do we march on? How does my family get relief for our suffering? I want to sue Chicago Mortgage Acceptance. Who has the referral? Thanks. Fred N

South Holland, Illinois

From:

December 12, 2003 Consumer Services/Real Estate

Office of Banks and Real Estate

310 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 2130

Chicago, Illinois 60604-4278

Via Certified Mail Chicago Mortgage Acceptance

Mr. Don Druse, President

Mr. Mike Grohe, CEO

435 N. LaSalle

Chicago, Illinois 60610 Dear Sir/Madam: I, Fred Nance Jr., submit the following account of my family’s encounter with Chicago Mortgage Acceptance, which has caused extreme harm to my family, my credit rating, and me due to the negligence and lack of due diligence to complete a transaction. It is with regret I report what appears to be extreme neglect and disregard by your employee Mr. Robert Jackson. I reported the following issues to Mr. Matthew Lanfear on or about December 3, 2003, articulating my issues in more detail and fashion. Matthew gave my case to Mr. David Essex to see if Mr. Essex could “fix” the case. I asked Matthew if I could leave a message for one of you. Matthew told me that I could not leave a message for either of you or talk to either of you because you guys hired him to take care of issues such as mine. Therefore, an important part of arbitration and consideration was broken. I engaged an employee who allowed me to speak to Mr. Mike Grohe, only because he was in the office at the time I was speaking to this employee. I spoke to Mr. Mike Grohe on or about December 8, 2003 who told me that he would look into my issues and investigate them, and get back to me. Mr. Grohe has never returned my call as he promised with any results from his “investigation.” Therefore, since I cannot get a response suitable to satisfy the requirements I sought upon entering into an agreement with Mr. Jackson, it appears that I must suffer the harm from my experience with Mr. Jackson, which subjects me to pursue other avenues for relief, such as, contacting and requesting an investigation from the Office of Banks and Real Estate. On or about October 14, 2003 I entered into a verbal and preliminary agreement with Chicago Mortgage Acceptance through Mr. Robert Jackson, loan officer, to re-finance my home, at 8.4% with two-year A.R.M., and provide debt consolidation through the American Financial Arbitration group. I asked Mr. Jackson to explain the two-year A.R.M. I told him I did not want to be locked into an 8% deal for two years. Mr. Jackson never gave me an answer as to whether this deal would lock me into 8% for two years. On November 27, 2003 I spoke with my sister, Dianne Nance-Kenner who retired from TICOR about my deal. When I told her about the length of time, she was amazed it was taking so long.

In addition, she told me that I should look at my proposed deal (the paperwork) to see if a box was checked stating I would be charged a penalty if I paid off the loan before it matured. I looked at my paperwork and the box is checked stating I may have to pay a penalty if I paid off the loan before it maturity. This is the question I continued to ask Mr. Jackson that he never answered. I called him on Monday, December 1, 2003 and told him what I had discovered. I asked him why didn’t he tell me this when I had been asking him all the time about being locked into this deal for two years. Mr. Jackson did not answer me. Mr. Jackson acquired a credit report on October 16, 2003 from the Factual Data Bureau, which is a merged credit report for Fred Nance Jr., and my wife, Darlene Bouyer-Nance who is the co-borrower in this proposed deal. Chicago Mortgage Acceptance acquired another report on or about December 8, 2003. The October 16, 2003 credit scores for Fred Nance Jr. are 556 from TransUnion, 535 from Equifax, and 513 from Experian. Darlene Nance’s credit scores were 529 from TransUnion, 527 from Equifax, and 522 from Experian. The December 8, 2003 credit scores for Fred Nance Jr. are 481 from Equifax, 516 from TransUnion, and 482 from Equifax, and Darlene Nance’s scores are 530 from Equifax, 524 from TransUnion, and 525 from Experian. How could Mr. Jackson allow this to happen? I believe he was inattentive and neglected to facilitate and expedite my file. I did everything he asked me to do. I provided all primary information and documentation needed. As we moved forward, I provided all secondary documentation needed. On October 22, 2003 Mr. Jackson met with my wife and I at the Chicago Mortgage Acceptance office located at 435 N. LaSalle St., Chicago, Illinois, 60610. Mr. Jackson gave us a list of items labeled proposal. He estimated the total payoff and savings. He told us what monthly bills we had to pay off. We paid the bills two (2) days later. I told Mr. Jackson we could not pay off the bills for Chase Master Card and Sears because of the amount they wanted. Mr. Jackson told us don’t worry about those bills because American Financial Arbitration would take care of them in the negotiations. American Financial Arbitration was supposed to negotiate our bills down before a “final payoff.” On or about December 2, 2003 one of our creditors called me and told me that they had made a deal with American Financial Arbitration for payoff on November 30, 2003. The creditor stated that since they have not been contacted and paid for this deal, the deal was off the table. The creditor stated that American Financial Arbitration told them that the deal would be completed by December 15, 2003. Therefore, the creditor was stated they were willing to provide another deal for me through American Financial Arbitration. I immediately called Mr. Jackson; explained and articulated the call I received. I asked Mr. Jackson why was it taking him so long to complete the deal when I had done everything I was supposed to do. Mr. Jackson told me that I would have to payoff the monthly bills I paid off before to get the deal going again. I asked Mr. Jackson why hadn’t he called me to alert me to the refinancing not going through. He said he was still working the deal out. I told Mr. Jackson that I was presently at court in the downtown area of Chicago, and that I was coming over to his office to get everything that he had of mine, and I wanted to speak to his supervisor. I was only ten minutes away. Mr. Jackson told me that he would not be in the office. I told him to leave my documents with the receptionist and that I wanted to speak to his supervisor. Mr. Jackson told me again he would not be in the office. I asked him why does he have to be there for me to pick up my documents and see his supervisor. Mr. Jackson did not answer me. I proceeded to his office. When I got to his office Mr. Jackson was there. I asked the receptionist to inform Mr. Jackson supervisor I wanted to see him. Mr. Matthew Lanfear responded. I explained the issues. This transaction should not have taken the time it did. There should have been some due diligence on the part of Mr. Jackson. Telling me not to pay bills because he would take care of them leaves the responsibility of the deal on Mr. Jackson. The credit scores I had at the beginning of this deal would have been sufficient to complete this deal. I believe I accomplished a refinancing in August of 2003 with the credit scores I had on October 15, 2003. On or about December 10, 2003 I requested and received copies of the credit reports taken by Chicago Mortgage Acceptance from Mr. Matthew Lanfear. At that time, Mr. Lanfear stated that he was still examining my case to see if the company could do anything with it. After discussion with Mr. Lanfear, I asked him if he does get someone to accept my refinancing would my interest rates be higher. Mr. Lanfear said yes. Mr. Jackson initially agreed that I would receive an interest rate of 8.4%, which would be a two-year A.R.M. After review of my agreement with Mr. Jackson, I suggested he assure me that there were no prepayment fees because I did not want to be locked into an 8% deal. Therefore, I am requesting the Office of Banks and Real Estate conduct an investigation into this matter. I sought relief through an investigation from Chicago Mortgage Acceptance to no avail. It appears that they are willing to let me fall through the cracks. I asked them how is one certified to do what Mr. Jackson does. I was told that Chicago Mortgage Acceptance does the certification for its employees, to which Mr. Jackson has been part of receiving his certification. This would tell me that Mr. Jackson is not licensed. Does one have to be licensed to do these transactions? This suggests a fault or liability of Chicago Mortgage Acceptance to allow a person to operate in such a manner as Mr. Jackson did. The fault and/or liability of Chicago Mortgage Acceptance is that with my testimony in this matter, Chicago Mortgage Acceptance has working knowledge of the issues and has chosen to do nothing. I know that Chicago Mortgage Acceptance can make my deal work in an appropriate manner, with appropriate arrangements, that is, a decent interest rate and appropriate loan payoff arrangements due to the physical strain and mental stress endured by my family due to the actions or non-actions of their employee. I believe they have a responsibility to complete what Mr. Jackson screwed up. My credit scores were okay to make this deal work in the beginning, when I engaged Mr. Jackson in his capacity of representing Chicago Mortgage Acceptance.

Respectfully submitted, Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC & Darlene Bouyer-Nance, BS

17239 Evans Avenue

South Holland, Illinois 60473-3436

708-921-1395 cc: Mr. Don Druse, President

Mr. Mike Grohe, CEO December 23, 2003 Consumer Services/Real Estate

Office of Banks and Real Estate

Mr. David Espinozo, Supervisor

310 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 2130

Chicago, Illinois 60604-4278 Chicago Mortgage Acceptance

Mr. Don Druse, President

Mr. Mike Grohe, CEO

435 N. LaSalle

Chicago, Illinois 60610 Mr. Espinozo: As of December 23, 2003, I have not heard from Mr. Don Druse, President and Mr. Mike Grohe, CEO of Chicago Mortgage Acceptance acknowledging receipt of the original letter or to acknowledge an understanding or remorse for what has happened to me with and through their company Chicago Mortgage Acceptance. The following is a list of creditors, which I have had to make arrangements with to avoid garnishment of my checks and public embarrassment.