If a loan has a rate lock at an initially lower rate, was extended, but at a higher rate, then not disclosed to the borrower would we be in violation of 19(e)(3)(iv)(D) for not disclosing the higher rate amount to the borrower? Further more, if when we extended the lock there wasn't a charge, but now there is due to another extension could we pass the fee along to the borrower if it was within three days?

The first rate lock triggers an automatic LE within three business days. After that, you only have to worry about capturing any new fees involved on a re-lock or extension under a changed circumstance.

so even though the second rate lock event was for a higher rate, we are still okay under TRID due to disclosing the initial rate lock to the borrower?

A change in the interest rate is not a changed circumstance and a rate lock extension or a new rate lock falls under 19(e)(3)(iv)(C).