DH: Is that so? Well I'll see your paycheck and raise you one. I happen to agree with you that there are standard forms in place that every lender "should" use. So based on one lender that you've recently purchased a house with you know 100% without a doubt that all lenders disclose "not to make purchases within the time of closing" to their clients? I'm going to tell you right now that's false.

Like I said before, if I would've known that this would've been an issue then I wouldn't have done it until after all was said and done. The documentation that I have doesn't reflect that, but then one could argue that as being common knowledge. True, but where was I in the loan process? Loan approved and closing complete. My credit was pulled again after the fact (which doesn't happen with every lender BTW).



Lol, there has to be some misunderstanding here, if the point being enforced is mutually agreed upon does the point need to be further introduced? I can see in one case if the person receiving the point has veered from the path and you as an accountability partner reiterates the fact to ensure they are successful. That would be completely understood. Aside from that, anything else would be a head scratcher don't you think?

Getting to the point - Who says that I blame everyone besides myself? I took responsibility and told the truth about situations that I was involved in. Please check two separate posts before this one. Not sure that I can blame myself for someone taking my check card number and charging it at a gas station though. That's like saying that a woman is partially to blame for being assaulted in a park for being beautiful.

So all this means that I get what you're trying to do and agree with you to a degree. But seriously, need less critical and more positive. I'm here to educate myself and work with like minded, positive individuals, but most importantly move on. DH: the horse needs to be buried man, so when you decide to put the stick down we can lower him down together. Okay?

I am just curious, did you read all the documents they had you sign/initial? I read ours, though the escrow agent brought a "fresh" copy to the signing appointment, so I couldn't rule out that they switched out some of the documents or something. As the stereotype says, there were over 100 pages, an inch thick stack of legalese. I don't recall reading a "don't buy anything major" clause but I already knew about it so I can't rule that out, either.



I am not clear about this part of your story. They pulled a credit report and retroactively un-financed you, after the closing was complete and monies disbursed? (that's what "closing" means in this context).

Look, I'm really just trying to help you out. I'd bury the hatchet (horse?) but as far as I'm concerned there is no hatchet.

But your statement above is mind-boggling to me. Why on earth would a lender pull your credit AFTER closing? In most cases that would actually be illegal. Or perhaps you still don't understand what "closing" is. Closing continues until the loan is funded AND the documents are recorded. And both of those acts must nearly always occur on the same day that you sign the documents. (There are exceptions but they are rare.)

So, I don't understand how things could have happened the way you say unless you were really quick about racing out to buy the car.

The bottom line is, once the loan is funded and the deed/mortgage are recorded, the lender CAN'T back out unless there was fraud or unless you broke some of the conditions before closing.

While what you say might have occurred (rescinding the loan after signing), it would have been very difficult for the lender to do that after closing because the money would have already been irrevocably transferred to the previous lender and the new deed would have already been recorded with the local government.

What makes more sense is that after you signed your documents the lender (or escrow company) did a final review to determine if the conditions of the loan commitment were satisfied and discovered that you had violated the terms of the commitment. The lender then refused to close based on those conditions not being satisfied. That may seem like a minor point but it's not because your loan never closed so they could not in fact have reversed the loan after closing.

If you look at your loan commitment you will see numerous conditions and one of those will address not taking on additional debt. It is not among the "disclosures" but rather a part of the loan commitment contract. You likely had a list of conditions that included a satisfactory appraisal, a clear termite inspection, and other conditions including the following two prohibitions (using different wording):

1. Spending excessively or incurring large debt. This includes buying a vacation package, financing a vehicle, becoming a co-borrower on another person’s student loan or similar actions.

2. Changes in your credit score before closing.

If you find your loan commitment letter you will almost certainly find those conditions either explicitly stated in your specific letter or in additional terms incorporated by reference.

Again, no hatchet. I'm not trying to criticize you. I'm trying to help you understand what happened so that you can avoid the issues in the future, and so that others can also learn from your experience.

I didn't say bury the hatchet. I'm saying stop beating a dead horse because your point was already well received sometime ago. Get it?



Hmmm my fault, I thought Closing was when you were at the table and already signed all the documentation and handed over your check for closing costs. About a week after that they ran my credit right before the were going to pay my current lender. So what you say does make sense, but they knew that I bought that car then, but didn't tell me anything about not being able to fund the loan at this time because of it. They let this continue on until the end of the month. I kept constantly asking was the loan paid. Well you know the story.

Thanks for helping clear that up

Will update more later.

In all fairness you did seem to mix the metaphors: