Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/08/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  It was a five bedroom double wide mobile home straight from the factory, I put $25,000.00 down on the home and that is not counting the gravel, the dirty and everything else I had down. This business sold the house to my son and daughter in law with my down payment and I did not sign off on any paperwork. Now my son and daughter in law are living in the mobile home and the business is refusing to give me my money back. The business is telling me that I need to take them to court. I do not have the financial means to take them to court. This business allowed my son and daughter and lay to put the home in their name without me even knowing. I have the contract, I have receipts etc. I would like to be refunded my $25,000.00

  Business Response

  Date: 06/10/2023

  On October 22, 2021, Mr. **** came in with his daughter-in-law
  to purchase a manufactured home. He filled out a credit application, signed a
  purchase agreement, and gave us a cashier’s check for $25,000 to be used for a
  down payment on the home. At this time he was the only individual purchasing
  the home. He was buying the home for himself and his son’s family to live in it
  with him. The credit application was submitted and denied. It was only able to
  be approved with at least 20% down which was $3,852.70 more than what he
  currently had given as a down payment. On October 25, 2021, Mr. **** agreed to
  the required 20% down and to add his daughter-in-law, to the credit application.
  This application was approved. On October 27, 2021, Mr. **** gave us a personal
  check (that he signed) for $3,852.70 to satisfy the down payment requirement.
  This check was written from an account that he shared with his daughter-in-law.
  He and his daughter-in-law also signed a new purchase agreement and provided the
  necessary documents needed for the lender to be able to move forward with the
  loan. One of these documents was a bank statement showing the account that the
  original $25,000 cashier’s check came out of. This was also the account that had
  his daughter-in-law’s name on it. At this time, Gifford Homes, Inc. held a
  total of $28,852.70 from a documented account that Mr. **** shared with his
  daughter-in-law, for a home being purchased by both Mr. **** and his
  daughter-in-law.
  Mr. **** was in the process of getting bids for the site improvements
  when he notified us that after the down payment, he did not have enough money
  available for the work that needed to be done. This included the excavating,
  dirt, rock, concrete, labor, etc. to get the site to the standards that the
  Missouri Public Service Commission requires on all new manufactured home installations.
  Gifford Homes, Inc. spoke with the lender to try and lower the down payment so
  that the money could be used for site improvements, but was told as long as Mr.
  **** was on the loan, that 20% down was required.
  On December 3, 2021, a new credit application was submitted
  with only Mr. ****’s son and daughter-in-law as the applicants. This
  application got approved with only 5% down. Mr. **** was aware that if this was
  the route that was chosen, he would no longer be on the loan. He wasn’t happy
  about the situation, but agreed that it was the only way to be able to get the
  loan for the home and have money left over to do the site improvements. On
  December 6, 2021, a refund check was issued directly from Gifford Homes, Inc.
  to Mr. **** for the amount of $21,552.70. This was the difference of the $28,852.70
  total down payment that was paid to Gifford Homes, Inc. and the $7,300 that was
  required as a down payment with the new approval. The $7,300 was withheld from
  the refund with Mr. ****’s knowledge and approval, knowing that only his son
  and daughter-in-law were on the loan. Gifford Homes, Inc. was told by Mr. ****
  that some or all of this money was going towards the site improvements. The check
  cleared the next day on December 7, 2021.
  On December 10, 2021 a new purchase agreement was signed by
  Mr. ****’s son and daughter-in-law. On December 29, 2021 loan closing documents
  were signed by Mr. ****’s son and daughter-in-law. On January 26, 2022 the home
  was delivered. On January 31, 2022 the setup of the home was completed and the
  keys turned over to the ****s. Mr. **** was onsite during the delivery and
  setup of the home, and very involved in every aspect of the process except the
  actual loan, due to him not being on it. Mr. **** was living in the home with
  his son, daughter-in-law, and their family for the first few months after the
  home was setup. This was witnessed by our service personnel while they were
  completing the exterior setup of the home and fixing some of the initial setup
  service issues. Mr. **** even called in to report some service/warranty items
  on June 27, 2022. Sometime in late summer of 2022, Mr. **** stopped by the
  office to discuss how he was kicked out of the home, how his son and
  daughter-in-law were living in the home that he bought but not allowed to live
  in, and finally that he wanted his $25,000 down payment back. He was told that he
  would not be receiving a $25,000 refund and provided with the documentation showing
  that $21,552.70 of the initial down payment was already refunded to him. He did
  not acknowledge this fact and acted like he either did not remember the refund or
  did not want to admit that he had received it. He was also given documentation
  showing that even though he said it was his money that was retained and used
  for the down payment (allegedly without his knowledge), that his daughter-in-law’s
  name was also on the account and was able to be use the money for a down
  payment on a home loan.
  As you can see, this should not be a business issue with Gifford
  Homes, Inc., as the transaction was completed with Mr. ****’s knowledge and
  involvement, and with the approval of the lender. He was also occupying the
  home, as planned, for some amount of time before he had a falling out with his
  son and daughter-in-law. This is a family matter that Mr. **** needs to take up
  with his son and daughter-in-law, not Gifford Homes, Inc. I have attached the pertinent documentation to this response. I will not release any documentation that Mr. ****'s name is not on, without the permission of his son and daughter-in-law.