Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Mortgage Investors Group's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Mortgage Investors Group has 12 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Mortgage Investors Group

  8320 E Walker Springs Ln Knoxville, TN 37923-3119

  
• 

  Mortgage Investors Group

  503 Lamar Street Maryville, TN 37804

  
• 

  Mortgage Investors Group

  1307 West Avenue, Suite 201 Crossville, TN 38555

  
• 

  Mortgage Investors Group

  311 Prince Street Sevierville, TN 37862

  
• 

  Mortgage Investors Group

  1825 Eastman Road, Suite 3 Kingsport, TN 37664

  

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:05/23/2025

  Type:Customer Service 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.

  We had signed a contract to close on Thursday 5/22. We were informed on Wednesday that we were not clear to close from Mortgage Investors Group not getting paperwork approved. We called and called seeing what we could do to get the closing done this week, the loan officer, ****, didn’t want to feel as though she was on a time crunch and rudely hung up on my agent. We got the branch manager involved and still nothing was getting done. COMMUNICATION IS NONEXISTENT. Everyone works from home and they are lazy. You will not get done with this deal on the timetime you need. 0/10 recommend using this lending company, also 0/10 recommend doing any deals with this lending company, and 0/10 recommend approving an offer if the buyers are using this lending company. I have not a single good thing to say.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/29/2025

  Dear Ms. *******,

  Mortgage Investors Group (“MIG”)
  takes all consumer complaints seriously, and upon receipt of this complaint,
  MIG reviewed the file for the mortgage loan associated with the complaint and discussed
  the situation with employees involved in the subject closing in order to
  prepare this response.

  First, MIG notes that you are one
  of the sellers involved in the subject real estate transaction.  You are not the borrower who is purchasing
  the home and obtaining a loan from MIG to do so.  You are also not otherwise a customer or
  client of MIG in the subject transaction. 
  So, there is no contractual or other formal relationship between you and
  MIG.

  Importantly, federal and state privacy
  laws, as well as regulatory rules, prohibit MIG (and all other mortgage lenders)
  from sharing details regarding any borrower’s loan application with third
  parties, such as sellers, real estate agents, title companies, etc.  Therefore, it would be unlawful for MIG to
  disclose to you any details regarding the borrower’s application process.  A lender is only permitted to communicate
  whether a loan application has ultimately been approved and if the transaction
  is clear to fund and close from the lender’s perspective.

  So, given the above, while MIG
  does empathize with your frustration about the delayed closing due to issues
  with the borrower’s loan application, these delays do unfortunately occur
  sometimes.  MIG prides itself on a strong
  reputation and track record for responsiveness and closing on-time, but there
  can be delays in the ultimate approval of a loan for any number of reasons resulting
  from actions of the lender, borrower, or other third parties.  Much to the frustration of others involved in
  such a transaction, such delays usually cannot be explained in any detail to
  sellers or other third parties due to privacy laws.

  Ultimately, MIG did
  approve the borrower’s loan application and informed the title company closing
  this transaction that MIG was ready to close on the afternoon of May 23rd (which was one day after the closing date shown on the contract).  However, it seems the title company staff had
  already left for the weekend and were unavailable to close that day, causing a
  further delay.  The closing subsequently
  occurred on Tuesday, May 27th following Memorial Day.  Since this transaction has now closed, it seems there is nothing further to resolve.      

• Initial Complaint

  Date:02/28/2025

  Type:Billing 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.

  January 31 2025

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/14/2025

  Mortgage Investors Group ("MIG") reached out to the complaining party ("Party") directly via email and telephone to try and determine the nature of the complaint.  Party was concerned that his credit report had been negatively impacted by MIG - either that MIG alleged he owed a debt or that MIG had pulled his credit without his authorization.  Party did not initially recall that he had previously submitted a loan application to MIG, but MIG was able to confirm that he had done so in 2021 and 2022.  As far as MIG can tell at this time, Party does not owe MIG any funds, and there should be nothing showing on Party's credit report from MIG other than the credit checks run in conjunction with Party's applications a few years ago.  Party was unable to confirm at this time if there was anything on his credit report that would contracdict this.  MIG also advised the Party that, in the event there are incorrect items on his credit report, he should file a dispute for the incorrect item with the applicable credit reporting bureaus (Equifax, Experian, and/or Transunion) in order to have it removed.  If Party, once he is able to examine his credit report in full, determines there are items showing from MIG outside the window of his last interactions with MIG, MIG has asked that he contact MIG directly so that we can investigate further and determine if there has perhaps been unauthorized use of Party's information.  At this time, this does not appear to be the case. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:02/12/2024

  Type:Order 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.

  In early January 2024 we ordered the property appraisal for the purchase of a new home, using Mortgage Investors Group as our lender. We were initially quoted at $200 and later increased to $250, citing the 'size of the lot' as a reason, though this was evident from the beginning. Unfortunately, the delivered appraisal had a major flaw, rendering it unusable as it only detailed a single building structure while our property had two separate structures. Despite our request, **** ******, Director of Digital Lending, refused to refund our money for the flawed appraisal.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/28/2024

  Mortgage Investors Group (“MIG”)
  takes consumer complaints seriously; upon receipt of your complaint, MIG
  reviewed the file for your mortgage loan application (which you initiated in
  early December of 2023) and discussed the situation with various employees
  involved with your prospective loan in order to prepare the following response.

  First, real property appraisals
  are ordered by the lender and are primarily for the benefit of the lender.  Although a consumer is entitled to a copy of
  the appraisal under federal law, the primary purpose of the appraisal is to
  establish that the real estate is appropriate collateral and has sufficient
  value to justify the loan amount. 
  Appraisals are not ordered for the consumer’s direct benefit; in fact,
  federal regulations require that the lender be the appraiser’s client, even if
  the consumer ultimately pays an appraisal fee. 

  Second, the appraisal that was
  performed for MIG was reviewed and approved by the underwriting and collateral
  team involved in the processing of your loan on December 19, 2023.  In other words, the appraisal was sufficient
  in its form and property valuation for MIG to proceed with the loan program you
  desired.  Specifically, the loan program
  you were pursuing at MIG involved obtaining a residential loan whereby you
  would be required to reside in the home on the property as your principal
  residence.  So, the fact that MIG’s
  appraisal came back and stated 1) the property contained a primary home and
  accessory dwelling unit, and 2) both homes were taxed under a single tax id and
  only one address was registered with the tax assessor was what allowed you to
  be able to proceed with this loan program at MIG.  Had MIG’s appraiser made the determination
  that the homes were technically two separate properties with separate tax ids,
  this loan program would not have been possible.
  

  However, on January 24, 2024, MIG
  received an email from you stating that you wished to cancel your loan
  application with MIG because you had “selected another local lender that more
  suits our requirements.”  At that time,
  you also directed MIG to send its appraisal to South State Bank (“SSB”) and
  assign its rights in the appraisal to this new lender.  MIG did send its appraisal to SSB within 1-2
  business days following your request.  It
  appears that SSB notified you on Monday, January 29th that some
  element of the appraisal that was originally performed for and approved by MIG
  did not meet SSB’s requirements.  From an
  email you previously sent, it appears there was some question from your new
  lender as to whether the property contained a primary home and an accessory
  dwelling unit or two separate primary homes. 
  

  As stated above, the appraisal
  originally submitted to MIG met all of MIG’s requirements for the loan program
  you were pursuing at MIG; MIG is not in a position to know what loan program
  you may have pursued at SSB or why the appraisal could not meet SSB’s own
  requirements.  From MIG’s point of view,
  MIG received your approval to proceed with your loan application, including
  ordering an appraisal for the property you were looking to buy; MIG incurred a
  fee from the appraiser for the work performed, which cost it passed along to
  you; and the appraisal MIG received was acceptable and sufficient for MIG’s
  purposes in approving your loan, consistent with MIG’s own guidelines and applicable
  regulations.
  

  MIG does empathize with your
  frustration that you were required to obtain a second appraisal to satisfy the
  lender you ultimately chose.  However,
  MIG previously declined your request to refund the appraisal fee it charged
  because the appraisal in question had already been reviewed and cleared by
  MIG’s own personnel more than a month before you emailed your loan cancellation
  and refund request.  MIG does hope that,
  other than the apparent issue with the appraisal, your closing on the purchase
  of the property with your new lender went smoothly and that you enjoy your new
  home; however, based on the information above, MIG does respectfully decline to provide the refund you requested.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 02/29/2024

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because there are conflicting and erroneous statements made which MIG present as factual, including:

  "First, real property appraisals are ordered by the lender and are primarily for the benefit of the lender." - In this case MIG is stating outright that they are solely responsible for the appraisal and ensuring it's accuracy. MIG charged me for the proposal (which was their requirement and benefit) while providing no useable service. They claim this appraisal suited their needs, but the fact that it would not meet any other lenders requirement is suspect and shows a lack of due diligence in their process.

  The next error is in MIGs failure of due process and proper diligence, they state "...appraisal that was performed for MIG was reviewed and approved by the underwriting and collateral team involved in the processing of your loan on December 19, 2023." and continue with incorrect statements including "So, the fact that MIG’s appraisal came back and stated 1) the property contained a primary home and accessory dwelling unit, and 2) both homes were taxed under a single tax id and only one address was registered with the tax assessor was what allowed you to be able to proceed with this loan program at MIG." where there are in fact two separate properties located on the same lot, 4524 and 4544 Grand Ave - not one address as MIG claims.

  Again, we request a refund of the payment as due by any fair operating and customer serving entity. I've no doubt MIG has performed outstanding services for many customers but in this case they failed, should own the mistake and do their best to correct it.

  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ***** *****

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/07/2024

  Dear Mr. *****,
  

  MIG actually is not “solely
  responsible for the appraisal and ensuring its accuracy” and has never claimed that
  to be the case.  Federal law requires
  that appraisals be completed by an independent, third party appraiser that is not
  affiliated with or under the control of the lender that is requesting the
  appraisal.  Ultimately the content of the
  appraisal is controlled by the appraiser and not the lender.  MIG’s initial response to your complaint
  clarified that appraisals are ordered for the benefit of the lender (and not
  the borrower) in order to verify the value of the property is sufficient for
  the loan amount requested and that the characteristics and condition of the
  property meet loan program guidelines.  Federal
  law requires that appraisals be completed in this manner for these purposes.

  The appraisal that MIG received
  as part of your loan application process indicated that the value of the
  property was sufficient for the loan amount and verified that the characteristics
  of the property met the requirements of the loan program you were pursuing at
  MIG, prior to your withdrawal of your application and proceeding with a
  different lender.  This new lender may
  have offered you a different loan program with different requirements; MIG is
  unaware of these details, and you have provided no information about this other
  loan application in either your complaint or follow-up.  It’s also possible that your new lender’s
  underwriters and collateral team may simply have interpreted information in the
  appraisal differently than did MIG’s.  In
  short, MIG was aware of no errors in the appraisal report itself, and you asked
  that MIG transfer said appraisal to your new lender prior to any such errors
  being discovered.  Since you had
  cancelled your loan application with MIG and decided to proceed with a new
  lender, it was no longer appropriate or legally permissible for MIG to request
  any errors be corrected by the appraiser, even if any such errors existed (as
  stated above, as far as MIG was and is aware, there were no errors made in the
  appraisal).
  

  For more information on Appraiser/Valuation
  Independence regulations, please refer to Regulation B (the Equal Credit
  Opportunity Act) and Regulation Z (the Truth in Lending Act), which you can
  access on the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau’s website at
  ********************     
  

  Based on all the information MIG
  has, the property in question is in fact one parcel that contains two separate structures:
  a primary residence and an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU).  MIG relies on appraisals and title searches
  to receive information about the property – MIG and similar lenders do not
  conduct their own investigations into the property that is to be used for
  collateral and instead get all necessary information from appraisals, title
  searches, and other third parties.  The
  appraisal MIG received did in fact state that the property contained a primary
  residence built many years ago, as well as a more recently built, secondary
  residence that the report described as an ADU. 
  Volusia County Property tax records also confirm this (please see enclosed
  property tax information, including a property search for **** ***** ***. that
  shows “No matches found”).  Both
  structures are located on one parcel of land with only one tax id; furthermore,
  only one of the two addresses you mention is listed in the county’s property
  records database, with both structures being taxed under the one, single
  address at **** ***** ***.  So, as far as
  Volusia County government is concerned, both structures are considered, and
  taxed as, a single piece of property, and they have no record of a property
  located at **** ***** **** 
  

  Based on this information, as
  well as the information provided by the appraiser, MIG concluded that this property
  was a single parcel containing a primary residence and an ADU.  Furthermore, the loan program you pursued at
  MIG would only be available if the property was of such a configuration – if there
  were two separate properties on two separate parcels, MIG would not have been
  able to offer you the loan program you were pursuing at MIG.  Perhaps you received a different kind of loan
  from your new lender, or their underwriting and approval process is different
  than MIG’s.
  

  From MIG’s perspective, it was ready
  and willing to proceed with the processing and closing of your loan, after more
  than a month of working on it.  Instead,
  you cancelled your application with MIG and proceeded with a different lender,
  which is of course your right.  However,
  it is also MIG’s right to be compensated for certain expenses incurred in
  processing your loan application, including the expense of obtaining an independent
  appraisal of the property and performing credit checks, among others. 
  

  MIG understands and appreciates that it is
  frustrating to you that your new lender could not, for whatever reason, utilize
  the appraisal that MIG had paid for, received, and approved for its own lending
  purposes. However, MIG has no control over the actions or decision-making of
  your new lender or over the independent appraiser following the transfer of the
  appraisal report to your new lender.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:02/28/2023

  Type:Billing 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.

  I sent in three checks to pay off my mortgage. The three checks were cashed, and two were applied to my loan.
  I called customer service multiple times trying resolve the payment issue, and was told the payoff had to be a certified check or wire transfer.
  
  The fact that they cashed my check made it impossible for me to cancel the check and wire the funds. The process they elected was as follows:
  
  1. They received my check
  2. Cashed the check
  3. Held the cash not applied to my loan for over a week
  4. Decided to send me a check from them
  5. Waited another week
  6. Scheduled to send me back a check from them
  7. I wait to get the check
  8. Deposit their check and wait for it to clear
  9. Then wire them the original funds that they had cashed my check for weeks earlier

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/10/2023

  This borrower
  requested a payoff amount for borrower’s existing mortgage loan, and borrower
  was supplied with this payoff amount and instructions to send certified funds
  to satisfy this outstanding amount.  Unfortunately, the three separate
  payments borrower made on February 23rd, although done via ACH, were
  not technically certified funds, and therefore a hold is placed on such
  payments (similar to a paper check written for a large amount), which then
  results in interest charges accruing during the hold period.  Because this
  was simply a miscommunication or misunderstanding, Mortgage Investors Group
  (“MIG”) refunded the borrower’s payments to borrower once the funds cleared their
  respective financial institutions, and borrower then had his financial
  institution wire certified payoff funds on March 7th; MIG made this
  payoff retroactive to the date the borrower initially attempted to pay on
  February 23rd and waived any interest that had accrued between the
  23rd and the 7th.  MIG has also expedited the refund
  for borrower’s escrow account balance (which by law must be done within 20
  days), and borrower should receive this escrow check within the coming days,
  which borrower can apply to any upcoming insurance costs as borrower sees
  fit.  MIG strives to provide excellent customer service and apologizes to
  this borrower for the inconvenience and stress caused by this situation and
  hopes that the reversal of any interest charges/fees and prompt refund of
  borrower’s escrow account balance will be a satisfactory resolution.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/01/2022

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore 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.

  I closed on a house on June 30, 2022 and Mortgage Investors Group was to handle the mortgage. On July 20th, I was notified they sold my mortgage to Mr. in Dallas, Texas. My first payment was due on August 1st, so I called Mr.. I was told they did not have any information on my mortgage and did not know anything about Mortgage Investors Group. I called Mortgage Investors Group and was told they sold my mortgage and could not help me and to call Mr.. I called Mr. and gave them the number for Mortgage Investors Group. A representative called them but they would not give her any information. I don't know where my mortgage is so I cannot make a payment. Mortgage Investors Group won't take it and Mr. said they can't take it because they don't have any information on my mortgage. I just want someone to find out where my morgage is and where I can make my payment.
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/31/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2022/08/16) */
  Note: names and dates have been partially omitted in the following response to protect the privacy of the Complainant.
  
  Mortgage Investors Group ("MIG") is in receipt of the Complaint you filed with the BBB on July 30, 2022. Upon receiving phone calls from you the prior day, followed by your Complaint itself, MIG began investigating in detail the issues you have reported with being unable to make a payment to your loan servicer, Mr..
  
  For your reference, your home mortgage loan was originated by MIG and closed in late June, 2022, and a few days after after closing, MIG transferred its rights in your loan to the quasi-government entity Freddie Mac (it is standard business practice for lenders like MIG to transfer the servicing rights in loans they originate to other entities/businesses that are set up for the sole purpose of servicing the loan during its repayment phase). In early July, 2022 Freddie Mac assigned the servicing rights in your loan to a business entity called Lakeview, which primarily operates as a loan servicer, but also sometimes uses a sub-servicer as well, which in the case of your loan specifically, the sub-servicer is the entity called Mr., which is located in Texas. Based on MIG's communications with officials at Lakeview and Mr. between July 29th and August 5th, MIG was able to determine that your loan information, due to a technical issue or some other reason, was not properly "boarded" (added to Mr. system and assigned an internal loan number) following the assignment to Lakeview. While awaiting official response from Mr. and the establishment of a loan number with them, MIG agreed to accept your loan payment via check on August 1st and to forward said check to Mr. immediately upon the successful completion of the boarding process of your loan into Mr. system, which I understand occurred on August 3rd, and which MIG was notified of via email from a Mr. employee on August 5th.
  
  I, along with MIG VP of Accounting and Servicing spoke with you via telephone on August 2nd for approximately 30 minutes to explain the status of your loan, provide you with our contact information, and assure you that MIG would continue to work with Lakeview/Mr. Cooper to ensure your loan servicing situation would be resolved as soon as possible. We also assured you that, due to federal regulations involving the transfer of servicing of a loan, that it would be unlawful for you to be assessed any late fees or for any negative credit reporting consequences to occur even had your payment not been received timely, due to this situation occurring well within 60 days of the transfer of the servicing of your loan. We also followed up with you on August 8th to ensure that you were provided with all of your new loan information and were set up to make payments with your new loan servicer.
  
  As of the time of my writing this response, I understand that you have now been provided with your Mr. Cooper loan number and your August 1st payment check has been submitted to Mr. Cooper by MIG. Hopefully you have no further problems in the servicing of your loan or in making your payments moving forward, but if you do, please do not hesitate to contact MIG, and we will work with you to smooth out any further issues, regardless of the fact that MIG has transferred its interest in your loan.
  
  Best Regards,
  Kevin Tonkin
  Legal Consultant: Contracts, Compliance, and Risk Mitigation
  
  
  Consumer Response /* (2000, 10, 2022/08/18) */
  (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
  Problem has been resolved.