Nightmare experience
I worked with Interlinc on a new home construction in 2022-2023 and the process was a complete nightmare. Multiple things came together to cause the process to end so badly. First being a new home build with a small company who did not finish the build on time – depending on the definition of “finish”. Second, the mortgage rates were going haywire; roughly doubling in 2022. In the midst of that, what I saw from Interlinc was a complete lack of transparency, changing the rules mid-stream, and in the end doing absolutely nothing to try to improve a bad situation. Lack of transparency: 1) It was not initially clear to me that the “locked-in” interest rate could be lost if the build were not completed on time, nor were the loan documents clear enough on this point. Case in point, a mortgage attorney read the document and called me to ask: “where is the section that describes what happens if the build isn’t finished on time?” 2) I periodically expressed concerns with not meeting the completion date and asked for clarification of what constitutes “finished.” I never received an answer to that question. Ultimately the build was deemed not finished enough because the dishwasher wasn’t installed (not a joke). 3) One loan officer said the build agreement could have been amended had the builder advised them that it would not be installed on time. This wasn’t mentioned to me despite my expressed concerns because, “it’s common for the borrower to express this concern only to have the builder ultimately meet the due date.” 4) Leading up to the construction completion date, many calls and emails went unanswered. My honest opinion is that they were trying to run the clock out on my loan because of the changing housing market. Changing the rules mid-stream: While the ramifications of not completing the build on time were unclear in the loan document, one section that was clear provided an option to extend the build period by 90 days; even allowing multiple extensions. Despite this, Interlinc offered only a single 60-day extension. I later found out this was because their investors were not comfortable with the direction of the housing market and wanted out. In my opinion, the combination of 1) the loan document not clearly stating the possible negative outcome of missing the build date, 2) the loan document very clearly providing a mechanism to extending the build date, and 3) using the wiggle room provided by the ambiguity to follow whatever path they or the investors desire, irrespective of the needs of the borrower, constitutes a very real truth-in-lending issue for Interlinc. No effort to alleviate the situation: 1) After the construction was completed, a loan officer called me to discuss the path forward. We didn’t finish, so I was told that I would receive a follow-up call the next day. That call never came; instead the next communication I had with Interlinc was a Notice of Default letter in the mail. 2) The next person I spoke to explained that my options at that point were to either convert the loan to a final mortgage with Interlinc at a rate of ~7.6% or to refinance with another lender. 7.6% would have been 3% higher than the original rate-locked value and also close to 1% above the market rate at that point in time. 3) The wrong loan payoff amount was provided to the new lender, forcing a reversal of the closure, updating paperwork, and re-closing. Clearly Interlinc was done devoting any sort of effort to my case and was not paying attention; at least until it appeared it would cost them money. Given all of the things listed above and more, the best I can say about Interlinc Mortgage is that they didn’t have the borrower’s best interest in mind, making a tricky situation ten times worse. The worst I could say is that they did not behave as a good-faith lender and potentially violated a signed contract for fear of a housing market downturn. If that’s the sort of lender you’d like to work with, then look no farther, Interlinc is ready to serve you. Otherwise, I’d suggest you look elsewhere. As-in anywhere else.
By Brad R.