Wells Fargo Bank Home Mortgage Sells Loan Products Rife With Opportunity for Fraud & Makes Consumer Eat Losses Minneapolis Minnesota

Wells Fargo Bank sold this consumer a loan product rife with opportunities for fraud by the contractor and HUD consultant, yet it provides no warnings or instructions to help consumer prevent this; furthermore, it fails to accept responsibility for the payments made without the proper city inspections. Then it expects the homeower to cover (and repay) the money lost to fraud - as well as pay for the additional work now required but not included as part of the original loan because the HUD consultant failed to do his job.

WFHM began paying off on a HUD 203K loan from job specs never seen nor signed by the homeowner, which was required. Furthermore, it paid out on electrical and plumbing work without the requisite city inspections, and now all that work must be redone because none was done to code.

The Job Specs were wrong from the start, yet the bank did nothing to ensure they were accurate, and the bank's role (according to the loan documents) is to protect the construction project. In this case, the job specs that dictate the work to be done on the house did not agree with the contractor proposal (unbeknownst to the homeowner, the contractor and HUD consultant were conspiring to defraud her).

The job specs are supposed to agree with the contractor proposal; when they don't, it's the bank's responsiblity to ensure they do. In this case, when the homeowner alerted the bank that they didn't (contractor began refusing to provide what was in his proposal, telling the homeowner he only had to provide what was on the "job specs" and that his proposal was only a "wish list"), the bank ignored her. Furthermore, when the bank finally did fax them to the homeowner (after the contractor was fired), it showed not only was the homeowner required to sign - but also to help prepare them. Additionally, right above where the homeowner signature is supposed to be is the statement about all section 1 items.

Almost all were excluded from the job. So now, with 2/3 of the money expended, nearly all the work must be redone - and there's additional work to be done because the HUD consultant did the work write up incorrectly from the start (the addition of the Section 1 items as well as a new roof).

I have made contacts with Senators and other legislators as well as with an attorney, which is costly. Meanwhile, my home has no kitchen (not one single appliance, countertop or cabinet); its electrical wiring is done backwards and in violation of even local electrical company codes; and I'm still waiting for the coldwater knob.

Victoria
Oakland, California
U.S.A.