Meridian Bank

Application LOAN-2026-00137   CREDIT ASSESSMENT

Mohit Karki · customer CUST-10259 · submitted 2026-08-31T15:21:05+00:00 · demonstration path A (Straight-through approval)

Assessment

Generated by the workflow. Advisory only — a lending decision remains with authorised credit staff.

The file's central figure — the nature of the recurring 2,650 debit and the applicant's stated zero housing cost — is entirely uncorroborated. Every other number in the file reconciles across independent sources, but the one that drives the DTI outcome does not: there is no mortgage statement, no title/deed evidence, no lender name on the tradeline, and no rent or cost-of-living proxy to test the claim against. The underwriter's own analysis concedes two live readings (secured mortgage vs. something else) and has no evidence favouring either, yet adopts the favourable one as the base case and derives a survivable stress from an invented 2,000 notional housing cost. That is not a stress test, it is a rounding of the unknown in the applicant's favour. A third reading — that the applicant has real housing costs, the 2,650 is unsecured, and "owns outright / pays nothing" is false — is never entertained, and if true it converts an arithmetic gap into a credibility gap that also discounts the 782 and the clean bureau history. Compounding this, the whole capacity and character picture rests on one opaque tradeline sized at 32.5% of net, and the recurrence of both the salary credit and the 2,650 debit is asserted from an undated, possibly single-month statement span that cannot support the 54-month tenure and income-floor claims. This is a material gap, not residual risk: it is checkable and it flips the decision. Decline as presented; the file is not ready to be settled either way, and re-underwriting is warranted once the tradeline is identified and the housing claim documented.